Most recent articles on prostitution related laws, opinions, comments

[Siocnarf]

I don't think they would ever use the Notwithstanding clause for something as minor as a prostitution law. And I'm not certain but I don't think you can apply this clause preemptively.

 

[freedom3]

You could be right about that. I don't know either.

It can be. At one time, Quebec passed a law that all of its law had the notwithstanding clause.

 

[AK-47]

goal of eliminating prostitution altogether

LOL.

Idiot

 

[Ladies4VIP]

I believe that the law will never truly be established as it is something that cannot be determined because it's behind closed doors.

 

[canada-man]

10:00 a.m.
10 heures
GOVERNMENT ORDERS

Government Bills (Commons)



C-36 — The Minister of Justice — Protection of Communities and Exploited Persons Act — Report stage (resuming debate on the motions in Group No. 1)


Length of speeches, pursuant to Standing Orders 43 and 76.1(7):


All Members — 10 minutes maximum and speeches are subject to a 5-minute question and comment period.


Committee Report — presented on Monday, September 15, 2014, Sessional Paper No. 8510-412-121.

Report stage motions — see "Report Stage of Bills" in today's Notice Paper.

Report stage concurrence motion — question to be put immediately after the report stage motions are disposed of, pursuant to Standing Order 76.1(9).

Voting — not later than 15 minutes before the expiry of the time provided for Government Orders, pursuant to Order made Thursday, September 25, 2014, under the provisions of Standing Order 78(3).

http://www.parl.gc.ca/HousePublicat...Pub=projected&Language=E&Mode=1&Parl=41&Ses=2

 

[krazyplayer]

http://openparliament.ca/bills/41-2/C-36/?page=1

 

[Prehistoric]

http://openparliament.ca/bills/41-2/C-36/?page=1

Interesting... On the latest vote (http://openparliament.ca/votes/41-2/233/) the results were:
140 - "Yes", 108 - "No" with only conservatives voting "Yes."
At the same time total 36 of NDP's, BLOC's, Greens, Liberals and independent did not vote. Well, 108 + 36 > 140. And if some smart Cons suddenly will get a severe flue on the day of the final vote ('cause they remember about Bedford's promise) and all who did not vote show-up in the Parliament, we stand a chance.

Well, wishful thinking... Whom am I trying to fool? :frown:

 

[MPAsquared]

Interesting... On the latest vote (http://openparliament.ca/votes/41-2/233/) the results were:
140 - "Yes", 108 - "No" with only conservatives voting "Yes."
At the same time total 36 of NDP's, BLOC's, Green, Liberal and independent did not vote. Well, 108 + 36 > 140. And if some smart Cons suddenly will get a severe flue on the day of the final vote ('cause they remember about Bedford's promise) and all who did not vote show-up in the Parliament, we stand a chance.

Well, wishful thinking... Whom am I trying to fool? :frown:

Wow! Ok folks, let's get writing the Yes men & the non voters!!!!! This could actually be hopeful! Flood their emails asap!!!!!

 

[escapefromstress]

Interesting... On the latest vote (http://openparliament.ca/votes/41-2/233/) the results were:
140 - "Yes", 108 - "No" with only conservatives voting "Yes."
At the same time total 36 of NDP's, BLOC's, Green, Liberal and independent did not vote. Well, 108 + 36 > 140. And if some smart Cons suddenly will get a severe flue on the day of the final vote ('cause they remember about Bedford's promise) and all who did not vote show-up in the Parliament, we stand a chance.

Well, wishful thinking... Whom am I trying to fool? :frown:

Wow! Ok folks, let's get writing the Yes men & the non voters!!!!! This could actually be hopeful! Flood their emails asap!!!!!

Good observations Prehistoric and I agree MPAsquared!

 

[Fallsguy]

The latest on the the status of C-36 at the HoC:

http://www.parl.gc.ca/HousePublicat...Pub=projected&Language=E&Mode=1&Parl=41&Ses=2

6:30 p.m.
DEFERRED RECORDED DIVISIONS

Government Orders

C-36 — The Minister of Justice — Protection of Communities and Exploited Persons Act — Report stage (deferred recorded division on report stage motions)

Committee Report — presented on Monday, September 15, 2014, Sessional Paper No. 8510-412-121.

Report stage motions — see "Report Stage of Bills" in today's Notice Paper.

Recorded division — deferred until Monday, September 29, 2014, at the ordinary hour of daily adjournment, pursuant to Standing Order 45.

Length of bells — 15 minutes maximum.

Report stage concurrence motion — question to be put immediately after the report stage motions are disposed of, pursuant to Standing Order 76.1(9).

Reminder that you can always follow the status of the Bill here: http://www.parl.gc.ca/LegisInfo/BillDetails.aspx?Language=E&Mode=1&billId=6635303

So when exactly is third and final reading of the bill? Is it on Monday the 29th, or is this just when the process toward 3rd and Final begins?

 

[Fallsguy]

The Senate’s mad dash to push Harper’s prostitution bill

By Steve Sullivan | Sep 26, 2014 4:29 pm

http://www.ipolitics.ca/2014/09/26/the-senates-mad-dash-to-push-harpers-prostitution-bill/

Two years ago, Parliament sent a bill to the Senate, expecting it to be passed without a lot of fuss. It was a private member’s bill which had the support of all the parties; it would have given provinces the power to allow single-game betting on professional sports. Not a burning national issue, exactly, but one worth lots of money to some people.

A funny thing happened to the bill when it got to the Red Chamber. Virtually ignored in the House, the bill was subjected to tough questions by senators; they explored the potential negative impacts and listened to witnesses’ concerns. In short, they did their jobs.

Of course, that was a bill about gambling, small potatoes compared to the next major shift in criminal law on the Conservatives’ agenda — Bill C-36, the government’s anti-prostitution bill. And don’t expect the Senate to give Justice Minister Peter MacKay any grief on this one; the government needs it passed soon, so the Senate part of the process is going to be a mere formality.

The government has a December deadline to introduce a new prostitution law, set by the Supreme Court. Eager to please, the Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee is conducting a “pre-study” of the bill even before the House passes it. Before her committee finished hearing witnesses, Tory Senator Linda Frum said that it is “highly unlikely” the bill would be amended.

And that, people, is what passes for ‘sober second thought’ these days. The committee heard from many witnesses opposed to the bill — but hearing is not the same as listening. Not even the lawyer who led the charge to strike down the old law, Alan Young, made much headway with the Senate. But the questions Young and other critics have been asking about the Harper government’s highly unlikely plan to ‘clean up’ the sex trade still haven’t been answered.

For example, Young wants to know why the government proposes to go on allowing sex workers to advertise their services if — as we’ve been told by Mr. MacKay more than once — sex work is degrading, all sex workers are victims and all customers are perverts. If sex work is as bad as the government says it is, said Young, “there should be an absolute prohibition.”

He also wonders how a worker can advertise her service, invite men into her home for sex — then make them criminals as soon as they give her money. This, Young calls ‘legalizing entrapment’.

He had a lot to say to the committee about the constitutionality of the bill and where his focus would be if he ends up being the one to challenge it. Few Conservative senators seemed terribly interested.
Senator Denise Batters asked him about the claim made by his former client, Terri Bedford, that she spent $500,000 on her case. Young said he received $40,000 and did the rest pro bono. The question had nothing at all to do with the bill.

Senator Thomas Johnson McInnes delivered a lecture on the democratic process and assured Mr. Young that he supports his right to disagree. No doubt that came as a great relief to Mr. Young, but again, it had nothing to do with the content of the bill.

Senator Linda Frum took issue with Mr. Young’s claim that there are “uplifting” stories of sex workers — because she hadn’t heard any (nor, apparently, had she read the transcripts from the Commons Justice Committee). Mr. Young offered to bring stories of people “content with their choices” to the committee.

Senator Jean-Guy Dagenais did not have any questions for Mr. Young because, he said, Mr. Young had answered them all. Seriously — the guy studied the issue for over a decade, took the government to court and won … and the senator couldn’t muster the energy to think of one question?

None of the Tory senators delved into constitutionality issues with Mr. Young. Apparently they’re content with assurances from Justice lawyers that the bill is constitutionally sound. This is the same Justice Department, of course, that argued the previous law was constitutional — and also said the same about the government’s bills on accelerated parole, 2-for-1 sentencing credit and mandatory minimum sentences for gun crimes. Wrong on all counts. I wouldn’t trust these people to tell me it’s raining.

Meanwhile, the government won’t allow us mere mortals to see the government’s legal opinion supporting the bill. We pay the salaries of those Justice lawyers; their work is done on our behalf, so we’re the clients. And a legal opinion is not a state secret — not, at least, in the saner world outside of the Harper cabinet.

Sex work is controversial and reasonable people can disagree on how to handle it in law. In fact, reasonable people should be expected to disagree about it. How much simpler it must be, in comparison, to be a Conservative senator: Wait for the prime minister to crack the whip — then jump.

What does it say about the Senate if everyone already knows what they will do with one of the most hotly debated and controversial bills in recent memory? Forget about sober second thought. Can we at least get some thought?

Steve Sullivan has been advocating for victims for almost 20 years, having served as the former president of the Canadian Resource Centre for Victims of Crime and as the first federal ombudsman for victims of crime. He has testified before numerous parliamentary committees on victims’ rights, justice reform and public safety issues and has conducted training for provincial and federal victim services. He is currently the executive director of Ottawa Victim Services and a part-time professor at Algonquin College in the Victimology Graduate Certificate Program. His views are his own and do not represent any agency with which he is associated.

The views, opinions and positions expressed by all iPolitics columnists and contributors are the author’s alone. They do not inherently or expressly reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of iPolitics.

What a sad, sad comment on what the Harper regime has done to democracy, indeed the very concept of democracy in Canada. The Cons don't even as much as pay lip service to it any more. What a vile regime this is. Oct. 2015 can't come soon enough. 397 days and counting. I wish it was sooner.

 

[canada-man]

Sex Workers In Finland Are Healthy, Government Reports

(FINNBAY) – Helsinki, 18 December 2013. The National Institute for Health and Welfare (THL) reported yesterday that people working in the sex and erotic industry in Finland take care of their health.

According to a survey carried out by THL and the non-profit organisation Pro-tukipiste. A total of 234 persons took part in the survey; 32% answered in Finnish, 29% in Thai, 34% in Russian, and 4% in English.

Survey’s methodology included collecting basic information about Finland, erotic, escort or sex workers’ health and welfare, as well as HIV and hepatitis C. The study was based on voluntary anonymous questionnaire and saliva samples.

The report suggests that sex workers of foreign origin are particularly disadvantaged in Finland.

Sex workers in Finland use condoms and get tested regularly

The study reported that all respondent groups used a condom: 95% of respondents had used a condom at most recent intercourse with the customer. Condom use was lower in the younger age groups than the older ones. HIV test or any other sexually transmitted disease test had visited in the last 12 months, nearly 60% of the respondents.

More than 40% of the respondents had at least once been vaccinated against A or B hepatitis. HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases testing and vaccination activity had a positive Pro Centre services for use: in the past year Pro Centre services had been used at least once a month for about 40% of the respondents.

Prostitution in Finland

Prostitution is legal in Finland; however, soliciting in a public place as well as organized prostitution (a brothel) is illegal. In June 2006, the Finnish parliament voted by 158 to 15 with four abstentions to approve a bill which outlaws the buying of sexual services from prostitutes if it is linked to human trafficking.

Advertising of prostitution has essentially been moved to the Internet where services provided are described in a straight forward manner. The customer is given precise information concerning sexual behaviors and acts performed.

In Finland, age of consent for having heterosexual sex is 16. Age of consent for having homosexual sex is 18.

Finnish sex workers are active in getting tested

The report shows that Thai speakers reported lower levels of health, functional capacity and income than the other groups. They were also less active in getting tested and vaccinated compared with the other language groups. Finnish speakers were very active in getting tested and vaccinated.

A significant proportion of the respondents speaking Russian or English were not entitled to public services.

For all the language groups, the prevalence of HIV and hepatitis C was higher than in the Finnish population on average. Three per cent of the respondents reported having HIV, and five per cent reported having hepatitis C.

Sex workers benefit from targeted support and health services

Respondents from all language groups reported having difficulties with speaking about their work to their physician. Sex work was considered a difficult, shameful or stigmatising topic. When respondents experienced problems with their work, they usually preferred to contact Pro-tukipiste or similar services instead of the authorities.

A significant proportion of sex workers of foreign origin are not entitled to access public services in Finland. From the viewpoint of efficient control of infectious diseases, for example, it is important that sex workers have access to targeted, low-threshold social and health services.

http://www.finnbay.com/media/news/s...thy-government-reports/?PageSpeed=noscriptSex

 

[Art Mann]

 

[Fallsguy]

Only question is that even after Oct 2015, whoever comes in, will they change anything without being told to do so by the courts?

Hard to say, but they might actually try to address the Supreme Courts concerns in a real and meaningful manner.

 

[MPAsquared]

An opinion from Australia, with relevance to the Canadian context:

Listen to sex workers – you'll realise we have a lot to say about labour rights

Sex workers work because we have needs and desires in life: food, shelter, the everyday costs associated with living. We are members of the communities in which we work and live

http://www.theguardian.com/commenti...lise-we-have-a-lot-to-say-about-labour-rights

It was with a mounting sense of frustration and despair as I read the piece Living in St Kilda opened my eyes to the world of prostitution. I’m lucky – I can leave. Frustration and despair because as a sex worker, former street-based sex worker and advocate for sex workers, too often I see non sex workers speak about our lives in derogatory and stigmatising ways – so often that there is a term for it: “pity porn”.

Pity porn is the depiction of sex workers as victims lacking in agency, as if we are incapable of speaking for ourselves, as if we are in need of rescue or rehabilitation. This is a view that fundamentally denies our autonomy over our own bodies, seeks to undermine sex workers’ struggles to have our human rights recognised, and places non sex workers’ voices as more important in dialogues about our lives and our rights. This is unacceptable.

Sex workers, just like other workers, work because we have needs and desires in life: food, shelter, the everyday costs associated with living, and yes sometimes drugs, although drugs rate quite low in terms of motivations to be in this line of work. We are members of the communities in which we work and live. Street-based sex workers are often the most visible part of sex worker community and therefore face specific issues in terms of both public and media attention.

In Victoria, street-based sex work remains criminalised and sex work generally is regulated under a licensing regime. What this means day to day for sex workers is that we are not treated as workers in other industries are. We are subject to a complex and often confusingly bureaucratic system of rules about how, when and where we can work. If we do not at all times comply with these rules, if we are subject to acts of violence, we are forced to choose between accessing assistance from services (including police) against a risk of being penalised for not complying with licensing regulations.

In light of all of this, it is particularly uninspiring to be scanning the news and come across an opinion piece that makes generalisations about us, as the writer’s interaction with sex workers apparently amounts to a few “good mornings”.

But if you truly want to know about sex workers’ lives, here’s a hint. Listen to them, we have a lot to say. We are not silent and we fight daily for better labour rights for our community. We appreciate good allies who listen and don’t attempt to speak on sex workers’ behalf. Good allies respect our autonomy and don’t make assumptions about us, but find out what the facts are – from sex workers.

Most importantly if you do write about us, understand that when you write about the environment in which we work as an “ever-present thrum of misery day and night, night and day” and describe us using phrases such as “their faces still soft, but their eyes hardening”, this stigmatises and dehumanises us. If you are really concerned about violence in our lives, if you want to be community-minded or supportive, key things that needs to be challenged are stigma and discrimination, the laws that criminalise our work and prevent us from accessing our human rights and labour rights as other members of society, these same laws disadvantage sex workers in seeking justice if we are subject to violence.

Assistance given to sex workers activism on these issues by allies is “supportive”, writing pity porn about sex workers is not.

Jane Green is a sex worker, member of Vixen Collective (Victoria's Peer Only Sex Worker Organisation) and treasurer of the Scarlet Alliance (Australia Sex Workers Association). Jane joins with other individual sex workers, Vixen Collective and Scarlet Alliance in fighting for the full decriminalisation of sex work across Australia

I'm practically standing applauding! This gave me goose bumps!

 

[Fallsguy]

I'm practically standing applauding! This gave me goose bumps!

Complete decriminalization, treating sex workers as any other workers with full rights and full protection under the law. This is really the only option that is really going to work. It's time to stop speaking for people who can speak for themselves, or "protecting" people who don't need our protection, or "rescuing" people who don't want to be rescued.
Bill C-36 is a truly Orwellian piece of legislation. As for standing and applauding, I'll be doing that on the night of Oct. 19th, 2015, when this vile regime of sycophants and toadies led by a sociopathic control freak is gone. That's 385 days and counting. I wish it was sooner.

 

[AK-47]

I just found a way around this stupid new law, guys.

We as Johns should just put our own ads on Terb offering sexual services. Then SP's can contact us for sex. We then invite her over, do the deed, but dont charge her for her time. We then proceed to give her a $250 tip for her time.

Problem solved. If both SP's and Johns have ads for their sexual services on the internet, neither party can be charged.

Yeah, I'm brilliant. Admit it

 

[canada-man]

under bill c 36 paying for sex may get one registered as a sex offender

 

[squeezer]

under bill c 36 paying for sex may get one registered as a sex offender

These regime is going for blood. Many keep downplaying what's coming but for agency owners, Strip club owners, clients , pimps, and massage parlor owners it's going to be all out war from the neo cons provided LE participate but I suspect they will. They've lumped all of us into the same barrel as pimps and traffickers.

I strongly suggest we avoid hotel incalls. It will be harder with condo incalls if discreet, especially downtown where everyone is coming and going. Hotels will be easy pickings especially if LE reaches out to staff for info.

 

[escapefromstress]

under bill c 36 paying for sex may get one registered as a sex offender

Do you have a link to the original document?