Bill C-36, In Force 1 Month, Any Developments?

[stay]

Touche! I would say that licensing is an improvement because the business must then operate within certain boundaries. But, I'd wager that no MP or SC operates strictly within all boundaries. Even the best bend the rules (albeit sometimes with a nudge and wink of a friendly bylaw or LE officer).

The bottom line is that we need to make an effort to become informed and to keep our eyes open. It's common sense. I don't trust my local car dealer that his first price is the "best deal ever", and I wouldn't trust an agency owner on his/her word either. Watch what they do and listen carefully to their answers to your questions. When people are blowing smoke, it doesn't take long to find inconsistencies. Of course, it's a bit more difficult in this business. It's built on fantasy and deception...and we as clients demand it!

Yes, the point is, as an industry ( client, owners, providers ), it is up to us to show that the industry is run on the up and up. We are so far away from that and the result is something like C36, if that goes down it'll be something else.
Licensing doesn't mean squat if rules are allowed to be broken.

Judging by how people drive I can confidently say that people only give a shit about themselves and government sometimes has to slap our asses.

FYI, the government is back in session and I didn't hear anything about C36.

 

[TeasePlease]

Yes, the point is, as an industry ( client, owners, providers ), it is up to us to show that the industry is run on the up and up. We are so far away from that and the result is something like C36, if that goes down it'll be something else.
Licensing doesn't mean squat if rules are allowed to be broken.

Judging by how people drive I can confidently say that people only give a shit about themselves and government sometimes has to slap our asses.

FYI, the government is back in session and I didn't hear anything about C36.

I agree on all points.

Frankly, I've been surprised at some of the things MPs get away with. Some rules or flagrantly and openly violated. Sometimes it makes sense (safety issues), sometimes its just pure capitalism.

Nope, no noise by anyone on C36. What I've found very interesting is that the Big 3 parties have been polling for the past month (ostensibly in anticipation of a rumoured early election). So far, I have heard any of the polls asking about C36. They ask about taxes, employment, foreign relations, local transit, etc. But nothing about C36. I was called at home one night by one (didn't catch which pollster or on behalf of who). When they asked an open ended question about issues that I'm concerned with (not included on their list), I said the erosion of personal privacy and freedoms, ranging from warrantless searches to c36. Maybe that will pop up on an analysis somewhere. maybe.

 

[stay]

I agree on all points.

Frankly, I've been surprised at some of the things MPs get away with. Some rules or flagrantly and openly violated. Sometimes it makes sense (safety issues), sometimes its just pure capitalism.

Nope, no noise by anyone on C36. What I've found very interesting is that the Big 3 parties have been polling for the past month (ostensibly in anticipation of a rumoured early election). So far, I have heard any of the polls asking about C36. They ask about taxes, employment, foreign relations, local transit, etc. But nothing about C36. I was called at home one night by one (didn't catch which pollster or on behalf of who). When they asked an open ended question about issues that I'm concerned with (not included on their list), I said the erosion of personal privacy and freedoms, ranging from warrantless searches to c36. Maybe that will pop up on an analysis somewhere. maybe.

LMAO.... Like a poling company is going to put forth this issue. Tell them what they want to hear, skew the questions. You should know better.

As far as c36 is concerned if we sample from Terb, we tend to think that this is a HUGE issue and how dare the government... Yet didley squat for suggestions save strike it down. My POV and it has been for a long time is that for prostitution related activities, the government HAS to be involved.
That being said I'm all for the next guy getting his dick wet in some warmth, I just want to know that she is good with her LIFE choice, because it is a life choice.

 

[TeasePlease]

Stay - Your sig pic is messed up. that's all.

 

[GPIDEAL]

Stay - Your sig pic is messed up. that's all.

I agree!

 

[stay]

It was supplied to me... What... TOO MUCH?

n.p I'll get on a new one. You know, for me it is only temporary anyway.

This business for me is about fun.

 

[Imnoguru]

NOW Magazine is still advertising sexual services as before, no charges have been laid against them yet but it would be the easiest target for the Feds to go after.

Good point MattRoxx. NOW publishes and distributes right here and doesn't seem to care... Didn't terb change its server host to "cc" (outside Canada) to avoid possible prosecution?

 

[black booty lover]

Good point MattRoxx. NOW publishes and distributes right here and doesn't seem to care... Didn't terb change its server host to "cc" (outside Canada) to avoid possible prosecution?

Now magazine came out and said a long time ago they were giving bill c-36 the finger.

 

[KBear]

Good point MattRoxx. NOW publishes and distributes right here and doesn't seem to care... Didn't terb change its server host to "cc" (outside Canada) to avoid possible prosecution?

The lady that runs NOW looks very concerned when shown in the news. NOW may have had to make a decision, either drop adult ads and go out of business or carry on and hope for the best.

 

[MattRoxx]

NOW is doing more than "hoping for the best".
https://nowtoronto.com/news/now-statement-on-canada's-new-anti-prostitution-laws/

With the new law in place, NOW is threatened by the loss of ad revenue needed to finance its independent journalism and under attack with the worry that criminal charges could be laid against us. However, the constitutionality of this new law is highly questionable. And the provisions around advertising are murky.

We retained Alan Young, the Osgoode Hall law professor who won the constitutional challenge that overturned the old prostitution laws, to offer his opinion on our right to continue running ads for sex workers. Supported by a substantive study of the wording of the law, we believe that running ads placed by sex workers themselves is still legal and we are transitioning our business to comply with this new regulation.

 

[MPAsquared]

The lady that runs NOW looks very concerned when shown in the news. NOW may have had to make a decision, either drop adult ads and go out of business or carry on and hope for the best.

Concerned? How so? They are ready to take it all the way!

 

[cye]

Concerned? How so? They are ready to take it all the way!

She should be concerned. Taking it all the way is expensive and the other side is financed by you and I and anyone else who pays tax.

 

[legmann]

Concerned? How so? They are ready to take it all the way!

She should be concerned. Taking it all the way is expensive and the other side is financed by you and I and anyone else who pays tax.

A number of lawyers (including Young) have already committed to working pro bono if need be. There is no shortage of opponents to C36 ready to fight it and test its constitutionality in court.

 

[oldjones]

She should be concerned. Taking it all the way is expensive and the other side is financed by you and I and anyone else who pays tax.

And all the current political momentum favours higher taxes to enforce more conservative social agendas. Everyone knows that.

Sorry, but I think that Our Dear Leader has satisfied and pacified his disciples by passing the law. Cash-strapped police chiefs and Crowns are unlikely to rock many boats sitting as quietly as they can, even if the water's been roiled a bit.

 

[KBear]

Concerned? How so? They are ready to take it all the way!

from MattRoxx quote of Alice Klein: "With the new law in place, NOW is threatened by the loss of ad revenue needed to finance its independent journalism and under attack with the worry that criminal charges could be laid against us."

Don't know how you could not see this as an issue she would be concerned about. Retaining a lawyer does not mean she is ready willing and eager to be charged and fight the law. Add to that she has likely never in her life had a concern about being arrested and having to do jail time.

 

[cye]

And all the current political momentum favours higher taxes to enforce more conservative social agendas. Everyone knows that.

Sorry, but I think that Our Dear Leader has satisfied and pacified his disciples by passing the law. Cash-strapped police chiefs and Crowns are unlikely to rock many boats sitting as quietly as they can, even if the water's been roiled a bit.[/QUOTE

Maybe but then you and I are not in a position where we have to contemplate a legal challenge. It is so much easier to litigate with other peoples money.

 

[rysard]

I think that Harper and his flock are getting a lot of what they wanted from C36 without LE doing more than casual harassment.

This perpetuates the ambiguity which drives down client volumes - fear is a powerful motivator for abstinence - and, not actually charging anyone outside of the core targets [underaged/forced/etc] prevents the legal challenge from starting.

 

[wanttodo]

I think that Harper and his flock are getting a lot of what they wanted from C36 without LE doing more than casual harassment.

This perpetuates the ambiguity which drives down client volumes - fear is a powerful motivator for abstinence - and, not actually charging anyone outside of the core targets [underaged/forced/etc] prevents the legal challenge from starting.

Hopefully nobody involved in a situation with consenting adults is arrested and charged under C36, but if if does happen this will provide much needed clarity and precedent.
The problem is there needs to be case law that clearly defines what specific evidence was needed to convict, and how high is the burden of proof on LE/Crown.

Once this is established, it will be easier to know how much risk each individual's activity involves, if any.

 

[rysard]

Exactly to the point - no reason to actually face a challenge if the threat is sufficient deterrent, at least for now... with time, desensitized lust will replace fear and LE will act

Hopefully nobody involved in a situation with consenting adults is arrested and charged under C36, but if if does happen this will provide much needed clarity and precedent.
The problem is there needs to be case law that clearly defines what specific evidence was needed to convict, and how high is the burden of proof on LE/Crown.

Once this is established, it will be easier to know how much risk each individual's activity involves, if any.

 

[Imnoguru]

I read that C-36 is reportedly having a chilling effect on at least one agency.
Asian Sexy Babe is reportedly not accepting new clients unless by referral from an existing customer, or if proposed new client has been on terb for over 1 year and pm's via his terb account. This development has been reported separately on terb.cc incall reviews forum; I have not yet confirmed this development myself, but will do later this month. Apparently as per terb discussion they are worried newbie may be part of police sting.
Anyone aware of this or any other restrictions with other agencies?
As I predicted at the outset of this posting (sorry all you naysayers), "escort" agencies and their customers are the likely targets , and this presents a growth opportunity for indies.