Supreme Court of Canada will release its decision on the Bedford, Lebovitch and Scott

[canada-man]

Motion to legalize prostitution pulled from Liberal meeting

Canada’s prostitution laws will be one of the biggest political issues of 2014 but won’t be debated at this weekend’s Liberal policy convention in Montreal.

The British Columbia Young Liberals had proposed a motion to legalize prostitution that was set for debate.

But the Young Liberals withdrew the contentious motion before the convention.

“When people started to look at it, they said it was highly flawed because the resolution didn’t take into account what the reality was in that world,” B.C. delegate Don MacDonald said.

Last year the New Democrats also dodged a debate on the legalization of prostitution. The motion hit the debate floor but Vancouver East MP Libby Davies moved an amendment to push the issue off to a future convention so the party would have time to build consensus.

Her motion was quickly approved.

MacDonald said the Young Liberals withdrew the motion because they accepted it was flawed, not because they were worried about controversy. He noted the Young Liberals proposed a motion to legalize marijuana at the last policy convention that was ultimately adopted.

“We’re not afraid of hot topics at all. What we are really concerned about is, if we’re going to do something, that we get the evidence and we do evidence-based policy-making,” said MacDonald. “This one just wasn’t ready for prime time.”

The Supreme Court of Canada struck down Canada’s prostitution laws in December and gave the government one year to pass new ones.

In a recent interview with The Chronicle Herald, Justice Minister Peter MacKay said he plans to introduce legislation this spring that will be shaped by the so-called Nordic model used in Norway, Sweden and Iceland.

The Nordic model legalizes selling sex but criminalizes buying it. In essence, it cracks down on pimps and johns rather than sex workers.

“Going after the perpetrators, we believe, is both legally and morally the direction we should take,” MacKay said.

It’s a controversial proposal because sex work advocates say it will continue to drive the sex trade underground.

http://thechronicleherald.ca/novasc...lize-prostitution-pulled-from-liberal-meeting

 

[GPIDEAL]

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/Punish+johns+prostitutes+says+Smith/9503018/story.html

the comments are more interesting than the news story at this link









a debate between a SP and anti-sexwork commentor






http://openparliament.ca/debates/2014/2/13/joy-smith-1/

latest news on the censorship anti-sex minister

Joy Smith Kildonan—St. Paul, MB

Mr. Speaker, I have with me this morning a petition with 3,000 signatures from all over our great nation, calling on Parliament to decriminalize the selling of sexual services by victims, and to criminalize the purchase of the sexual services by the predators who use them.

I respectfully submit this from petitioners all across Canada.

How can Joy Smith Kildonan be credible when she calls johns predators?

We should take her to task with the Minister why her view is blatantly biased and has no place in a secular, free society. We don't need witches burning innocent men at the stake.

 

[canada-man]

Government Moving Too Far, Too Fast on Prostitution Law Reform

VANCOUVER: As the Conservative government announces a national public consultation on prostitution law reform, FIRST, a feminist advocacy group for the rights of sex workers, warns that the government is moving too fast. They are urging the government to put in place an expanded consultation process that includes significant input from sex workers.



“The government has given the public only 30 days to provide input on this critical human rights issue,” said Esther Shannon, a FIRST spokesperson. “That’s far too short a time period for Canadians to weigh in on this complex issue, especially when sex workers’ lives are at stake. We know that bad laws can have horrific consequences, and that must never be taken lightly.”



The Supreme Court of Canada struck down three Criminal Code prostitution-related offences as unconstitutional, in its Dec 20 decision in Bedford v. Attorney General of Canada. The court left the laws in force for one year to give the government time to decide what to do, if anything.



“We urge the federal government to bring sex worker groups to the table immediately,” said Joyce Arthur of FIRST. “No law can be passed without the input of sex workers, who are the experts on this issue. It’s their livelihood, so they know best how to make it safer for themselves and for the communities they live and work in.”



Sex workers in Canada are near universally opposed to the possible re-criminalization of prostitution, because criminalization in any form violates their rights and endangers their safety. “The government should take the time to review the wealth of evidence that is now available to demonstrate the harm of criminal prostitution laws,” said Arthur. “The Supreme Court relied on this evidence to strike down the current laws.”



“It’s clear from the consultation webpage that the federal government would like to pass a new criminal law that targets clients, like we see in Sweden and Norway,” Shannon said. “However, evidence from those countries shows that this approach would continue the violence and other harms that Canadian sex workers experienced under the struck-down laws. A Swedish-type law would be unconstitutional on the same grounds.”



“Sex workers want the government to look at the approach adopted by New Zealand, which successfully decriminalized and regulated prostitution in 2003 after close involvement by sex worker groups,” said Arthur. “A 2008 government review found that sex workers in New Zealand are now working under safer conditions, and neither sex work or trafficking have increased.”



Shannon said the public also needs more time to get better informed on the issue. She cited surveys by Angus Reid in 2009 and 2010, which found that less than a quarter of Canadians (22%) know that exchanging sex for money is legal in Canada, while 70% mistakenly believe that the practice is illegal. Regardless, the Canadian public has already spoken out decisively against criminalization. A 2011 Angus Reid poll found that over two-thirds of Canadians (67%) think prostitution should be legal between consenting adults. Only 16% of Canadians support the adoption of a Swedish-type law, while almost half (42%) support the New Zealand approach.

https://www.facebook.com/notes/firs...-on-prostitution-law-reform/10152264377841197

 

[Toronto`s Finest]

Although Prostitution Laws impact Prostitutes the MOST...... Ironically, The Harper Government appears to ignore them or any group representing them .... THE MOST. For these groups & all prostitutes it appears as if trying to talk to This Dictator , Religious Government is like " Pissing In The Wind " . I really think these groups NEED to organize Protests on Parliament & get Massive Media attention..... AND FAST!!

 

[AK-47]

Someone called in on talkradio the other day saying countries that punish prostitution harder also often have higher rape stats. Guess what, according to wiki Sweden had the 4th highest rape stats per capita in the whole world. And the USA sits in 10th spot.

Scary stuff (click on 2010): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_statistics

Sweden was in 3rd place in 2008 and 2009

 

[bubble pop]

Someone called in on talkradio the other day saying countries that punish prostitution harder also often have higher rape stats. Guess what, according to wiki Sweden had the 4th highest rape stats per capita in the whole world. And the USA sits in 10th spot.

Scary stuff (click on 2010): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_statistics

Sweden was in 3rd place in 2008 and 2009

Sweden's definition of rape is a lot different from the rest of the world's.

 

[afterhours]

Sweden's definition of rape is a lot different from the rest of the world's.

I looked it up and it seems to be very close to what we have in Canada

 

[TeasePlease]

Motion to legalize prostitution pulled from Liberal meeting

Canada’s prostitution laws will be one of the biggest political issues of 2014 but won’t be debated at this weekend’s Liberal policy convention in Montreal.

The British Columbia Young Liberals had proposed a motion to legalize prostitution that was set for debate.

But the Young Liberals withdrew the contentious motion before the convention.

“When people started to look at it, they said it was highly flawed because the resolution didn’t take into account what the reality was in that world,” B.C. delegate Don MacDonald said.

Last year the New Democrats also dodged a debate on the legalization of prostitution. The motion hit the debate floor but Vancouver East MP Libby Davies moved an amendment to push the issue off to a future convention so the party would have time to build consensus.

Her motion was quickly approved.

MacDonald said the Young Liberals withdrew the motion because they accepted it was flawed, not because they were worried about controversy. He noted the Young Liberals proposed a motion to legalize marijuana at the last policy convention that was ultimately adopted.

“We’re not afraid of hot topics at all. What we are really concerned about is, if we’re going to do something, that we get the evidence and we do evidence-based policy-making,” said MacDonald. “This one just wasn’t ready for prime time.”

The Supreme Court of Canada struck down Canada’s prostitution laws in December and gave the government one year to pass new ones.

In a recent interview with The Chronicle Herald, Justice Minister Peter MacKay said he plans to introduce legislation this spring that will be shaped by the so-called Nordic model used in Norway, Sweden and Iceland.

The Nordic model legalizes selling sex but criminalizes buying it. In essence, it cracks down on pimps and johns rather than sex workers.

“Going after the perpetrators, we believe, is both legally and morally the direction we should take,” MacKay said.

It’s a controversial proposal because sex work advocates say it will continue to drive the sex trade underground.

http://thechronicleherald.ca/novasc...lize-prostitution-pulled-from-liberal-meeting

With both the Liba and NDP dodging debate and adopting an official policy position on the issue, I don't see why people are hopeful that her majesty's loyal opposition will be of any help in tempering Harper's leaning towards the Nordic model...

 

[AK-47]

Sweden's definition of rape is a lot different from the rest of the world's

How so??

 

[canada-man]

http://www.nowtoronto.com/news/story.cfm?content=196766

You can be a prostitute... just don’t work as one
If recent police raids are a clue, sex workers should be leery of the Nordic model wrapped in feminist rhetoric that the feds are eying to replace past sex laws

By Fleur de Lit

Key portions of the laws that criminalize sex work in Canada may have been deemed unconstitutional in December, but in recent months in provinces from Saskatchewan to Nova Scotia, police have been posing as clients in a campaign called Operation Northern Exposure.

They make appointments with sex workers and then show up at the door four strong claiming to be looking for trafficked people.

These raids seem devious and cynical now that the Supreme Court has declared laws criminalizing sex work unconstitutional. Those laws that have yet to be renewed.

Are there not more compassionate and intelligent ways of locating and assisting trafficked people? Or are we to pretend that these raids are being undertaken for the good of sex workers? That is utterly false.

It’s time for police and special interest groups to stop treating sex clients as rapists. They are not.

Rapists are rapists. When four men who are in fact police pose as clients and demand to be let in to a sex worker’s space with her tenuous and frightened consent, that sounds like assault to me.

Now, of course it’s in my best interest that I don’t have rapists as clients.

But like many sex workers, I don’t call people who rape sex workers clients. I call them rapists, or people posing as clients. I also don’t want clients to be scared away because police may brand them as rapists and ruin their lives. Initiatives like Operation Northern Exposure have this effect.

These raids are reported in the media, alarming people who use intimate services and creating an atmosphere of criminality around sex work. An atmosphere of criminality around a business attracts people for whom consequence is not an issue.

I don’t think restaurant owners should be criminalized outright just because I was sexually assaulted by one. Another lied to an agitated drug user who had a gun to my head that there was no money in the till.

As a sex worker, on the other hand, I have never been assaulted or robbed. I’m told that this makes me one of the lucky ones. Do people say that to servers who haven’t been assaulted?

If the recent raids are a sign, seems sex workers are right to be concerned the feds could replace the old “you can be a prostitute, just don’t work as one” model with the so-called Nordic model.

Simply put, the Nordic model criminalizes clients. If we were honest, we would call this the End Desire or the End Pleasure model.

First implemented in Sweden in 1999, this piece of legislation came wrapped in a package of “feminist” ideals that included more severe penalties for sexual harassment, sexual violence and domestic violence.

As Sandra Ka Hon Chu and Rebecca Glass write in Sex Work Law Reform In Canada: Considering Problems With The Nordic Model, the Swedish legislation provides a framework for prostitution that “conflates sex work with trafficking, pathologizes male clients and renders male and trans workers largely invisible.”

News flash: clients have always been pathologized in Canada. If you want to see this in action, just go to court after street sweeps.

You’re likely to see men, sometimes alone, sometimes with a male friend translating the proceedings, occasionally with harried lawyers, being pushed through a legal sausage grinder and advised to just pay the fine and do john school.

Many of these men are precariously employed and their English, the language in which they will have been notified of their rights at the time of arrest, basic at best.

They will have had to take a day off work, lie to their employers and now go to john school, which costs $500, where a discontented former prostitute will tell them they’re rapists.

The john school website also uses the words “human trafficking” a lot, even though most who end up there are involved in no such thing.

As Laura Agustín, author of Sex At The Margins: Migration, Labour Markets And The Rescue Industry, said in an interview with the Huffington Post in 2011, “Anti-trafficking campaigns are now a popular form of social action, but many don’t know what kinds of abuses take place in the name of saving people.” Ask women who get caught up in raids what it’s like.

The Nordic model is already having universal implications.

The U.S. Defense Department has rewritten the Uniform Code Of Military Justice to include “patronizing a prostitute” as a criminal offence for soldiers.

The UN has banned peacekeepers from purchasing sexual services and from frequenting zones or establishments where sex work might take place.

The phrase “patronizing a prostitute” stands out for me. Laws that patronize (and by that I mean “demean”) prostitutes are dangerous, not the clients who patronize prostitutes.

In the coming months, sex workers lobbying for our right to ply our trade have a lot of work ahead.

It’s not enough to say that the Nordic model is bad. That doesn’t give politicians who will be making the decisions anything to work with. We need strategies.

People often ask me what I want. It’s simple. I want people to know that my work isn’t inherently dangerous. But that I should be able to take the same measures as any worker to protect myself, and those measures shouldn’t involve having to first and foremost protect myself from stigma, state abuse and faith-based laws.

I wish those who impose their faith-based judgment on me would stop using trafficking as a red herring. If they have to keep conflating sex work with trafficking, I wish they’d at least include the Catholic Church. The systematic rape and molestation facilitated by the Vatican itself of thousands of children over decades is definitely sex trafficking.

Sex and sex work are complicated. I understand this. I am so confounded by sex sometimes.

But let’s not criminalize and demonize consenting people for accessing it as a service. Fear shouldn’t inform law.

The author is a sex worker. Fleur De Lit is a pseudonym.

http://www.nowtoronto.com/news/story.cfm?content=196766

 

[canada-man]

Sgt. Derek Mellor pleads guilty to sex charges, sending lewd pictures

The officer in charge of a police pilot project created to combat human trafficking and rescue sex trade workers has pleaded guilty to nine Police Services Act charges after engaging in sexual acts and sending lewd messages and photos of his penis to sex workers and colleagues.


Sgt. Derek Mellor — a 14-year veteran of the service who was once the lead of Hamilton Police’s anti-human trafficking initiative dubbed “Project Rescue” — appeared Monday morning at Hamilton police headquarters. He said little, but replied “guilty” each time he was asked how he was pleading to the charges, which included relations with five different women who were somehow involved with his job.


As part of an agreed statement of facts, Mellor admitted to undertaking a sexual relationship with the mother of a woman whose human trafficking case he was working on. He admitted to engaging in sexual activity with her on the side of a rural road, sending her pictures of his penis and a three-second video of him masturbating.

Over that period of time, the woman sent Mellor a number of photos of her in lingerie, and her profile from a website that advertises discreet relationships between married couples.


Mellor also pleaded guilty to sending sexual photos and texts to two women who worked with the human trafficking volunteer organization “Walk With Me.” In both cases, he obtained their contacts through working together and at social gatherings and fundraisers for sex workers. The messages started as flirtatious before escalating to blatantly sexual, according to police act documents

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/hamil...o-sex-charges-sending-lewd-pictures-1.2549446

 

[AK-47]

^^^^^ holy shit, thats hilarious :biggrin1:

 

[canada-man]

Crown withdraws prostitution charges against alleged Calgary madame after Supreme Court ruling

While the law remains in place, at least one alleged Calgary madame has benefited from a Supreme Court ruling on prostitution.

On Wednesday, the Crown withdrew a charge of keeping a common bawdy house against a city woman.

And outside court her lawyer explained the logic for dropping the prosecution against massage parlour operator Xiu Mei Xia was she wasn’t taking advantage of her workers.

“The circumstances in this case were not exploitative,” Zuk said, after appearing before provincial court Judge Gord Wong on behalf of his client.

“If you’re just running a shop, it’s not exploitative and they’re not proceeding (with a prosecution).”

Xia, 35, was charged with keeping a common bawdy house between Jan. 28 and June 5 of last year.

http://www.calgarysun.com/2014/02/2...ged-calgary-madame-after-supreme-court-ruling

 

[canada-man]

Speak up for us says sex workers

A sex worker support group is reaching out to make sure their voices are heard as the federal government debates what to do next following the landmark decision that struck down some prostitution laws.

Prostitutes of Ottawa/Gatineau, Work, Educate and Resist issued a call to action this week for supporters of sex worker rights to make sure they speak up.

The Department of Justice is conducting an online public consultation on the next steps following the Supreme Court decision in December, that found the bans on brothels, communicating for the purposes of prostitution and living off its avails violate the Charter of Rights and Freedoms because they endanger the lives of sex workers.

Now, they want input from the public, via an online questionnaire, to help shape government response when it comes to prostitution.

"We want people who support sex workers' rights to have their say in this," said Emily Symons, with POWER.

"I think the majority will be able to fill out the questionnaire."

Since many sex workers turn to online for their work, using sites such as backpage.com, POWER doesn't think getting feedback should be difficult.

But the group is also discussing possible ways they can reach out to street sex trade workers, who may have trouble accessing the Internet, to have their voices heard as well.

POWER is calling on all sex workers and supporters to participate in the consultation, as an opportunity they say to support their rights to work in safety and dignity.

It will be a year before the Supreme Court decision takes effect, which could mean the decriminalization of most adult activities related to prostitution.

The online consultation runs until March 17. For information, visit justice.gc.ca.

danielle.bell@sunmedia.ca

Twitter@ottawasundbell

-with QMI files

http://www.ottawasun.com/2014/02/25/speak-up-for-us-says-sex-workers

 

[kbiii2]

Nice to answer a survey, but the results can be interpreted any way you want it to appear.

When are the SW's and people from groups like POWER and Maggie's going to get real and start going directly to the press in groups and organizing protests on
Parliament Hill and in front of the major city provincial government headquarters? A couple of hundred or more being persistent on Parliament Hill would probably
accomplish a lot more than any survey. Just like Kiev, minus the Molotov Cocktails, guns and tires of course. And nicely dressed.

Everybody keeps complaining on here how the government is not consulting the people this all effects the most the sex workers. So sex workers should consider
taking their positions and feelings directly to the government in mass. To quote an old saying: "If you want it done right do it yourself."

People really notice and think about the issue seriously when they actually see in flesh and blood the people being affected by some potential negative change. Right
now they are being brainwashed into thinking all sex workers are victims. Only the SW's themselves can change that perception just like the gays campaigned to get
people to be more accepting of their lifestyle. They had to approach the press and demonstration too.

 

[drlove]

Nice to answer a survey, but the results can be interpreted any way you want it to appear.

When are the SW's and people from groups like POWER and Maggie's going to get real and start going directly to the press in groups and organizing protests on
Parliament Hill and in front of the major city provincial government headquarters? A couple of hundred or more being persistent on Parliament Hill would probably
accomplish a lot more than any survey. Just like Kiev, minus the Molotov Cocktails, guns and tires of course. And nicely dressed.

Everybody keeps complaining on here how the government is not consulting the people this all effects the most the sex workers. So sex workers should consider
taking their positions and feelings directly to the government in mass. To quote an old saying: "If you want it done right do it yourself."

People really notice and think about the issue seriously when they actually see in flesh and blood the people being affected by some potential negative change. Right
now they are being brainwashed into thinking all sex workers are victims. Only the SW's themselves can change that perception just like the gays campaigned to get
people to be more accepting of their lifestyle. They had to approach the press and demonstration too.

Exactly! So, why aren't they doing anything?!?

 

[canada-man]

Once Again: Why the Nordic Model is Bad


http://blog.terrijeanbedford.com/2014/02/28/once-again-why-the-nordic-model-is-bad/

Laws supposedly meant to protect sex workers by penalizing only so-called pimps and clients, and not sex workers, will replicate the harms and illegalities of the laws just struck down and may not survive the courts. The other countries did not have our recent court ruling on what makes laws themselves right or wrong. That ruling makes the Nordic Model wrong. There are several things wrong with the Nordic Model. Here are a few of them. (1) Anti-pimping laws criminalize anyone who shares in a sex worker’s earnings, including her husband, other family members and friends. Police can harass or threaten people around her who they may wish to suspect as an associate.

(2) The laws even form a barrier to sex workers who wish to marry and or leave the business for other reasons. A husband becomes legally vulnerable, even if he shares the household expenses. Women who support their husbands in whole or in part in other occupations, and, yet, no one passes laws against living off the proceeds of their work. Why are sex workers singled out from women in other occupations? That singling out is not legal after the recent court decision.

(3) The Nordic approach also makes sex workers less safe. Pimps often provide services for and protection to sex workers. For example, they drive women to appointments, wait in the car, and know when to worry if the woman does not return. They copy down the license plates of cars into which street walkers climb, which provides some safeguard against the women simply disappearing.
(4) Laws against clients endanger sex workers on the street. These women are the most vulnerable of sex workers because they lack the safety of working indoors and non-violent men are far more likely to be afraid of and discouraged by the prospect of being arrested than are psychopaths. This is especially true of family men or those who have a respected position in their communities. A minister, a lawyer, a teacher, a psychologist or a doctor have a great deal to lose by being arrested and having the arrest publicized, so are reluctant to take the risk.

(5) There will not necessarily be fewer women selling sex, however, especially on the street level where driving forces like drug-use keep the numbers high. With a smaller pool of customers for whom to compete, these women may act with less caution; for example, they may be more willing to get into cars they might otherwise not get into. On the other hand, there will be as many physically abusive men and criminals in the client pool because a person who is willing to beat or to kill a sex worker is unlikely to be discouraged by the possibility of a minor charge of buying sex. The preferred clients have moved to the Internet, but the dangerous ones stayed on the streets.

(6) Those on the streets work in risky conditions because they go further into remote areas. Under the Nordic Model they have to do the negotiation very quickly. It doesn’t give them any time to assess risk. The quick negotiation will also result from a client’s unwillingness to linger a moment longer than necessary.

(7) It is currently common practice for sex workers to screen their clients in advance to seeing them. They know the client’s name and phone number. Under the Nordic Model, however, clients have more incentive to remain anonymous rather than risk arrest. Sex workers will have to accept calls from blocked numbers and won’t know who they are seeing. So much for the Nordic Model.

(8) There is no indication that the Nordic Model, as being considered for Canada at present, would adequately define what are not permissible acts between consenting adults in private for money or not, and so the law will fail for that alone.

(9) I could go on and on, but enough for now.

 

[AK-47]

Globe & Mail wants legalization:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/glob...ution-should-it-be-legal-yes/article17173130/

Prostitution: Should it be legal? Yes

So now what? A few days before Christmas, the Supreme Court of Canada handed the federal government a present that was about as welcome as a lump of coal: It struck down Canada’s prostitution laws. Ottawa was given one year to come up with new rules. The clock is now loudly ticking: There are fewer than 10 months remaining before the deadline.

Justice Minister Peter MacKay, who last week opened a public consultation period on the subject, has said that his Conservative government will deliver a new legal regime well before the end of the year. Given that his government has a majority, getting legislation passed won’t be difficult. But coming up with laws that actually work, and which can satisfy both voters and the judges of the Supreme Court? That’s going to be a challenge.

The choice for Canadians is between two ways of dealing with the oldest profession: the Nordic model vs. the Dutch model. The government appears to be favouring a version of the former, but the long-standing practice of Canadian law, and the approach the Supreme Court seemed to be leaning toward, are closer to the latter.

Under the Nordic approach, used in Sweden and several other European countries, prostitution is a crime – but the police target the buyers of sex, rather than the sellers. Under the Dutch model, the sale of sex is legal, and government regulates where and how it is sold. The Nordic model aims to eliminate prostitution, or at least greatly reduce its occurrence. The Dutch model legalizes it, with the goal of reducing harms.

“It is not a crime in Canada to sell sex for money.” That’s the first line of the Supreme Court judgment striking down the prostitution laws. Various activities surrounding sex work were against the law – the three pillars of the old legal regime made it illegal to run a brothel or to work in one, to be the manager or employee of a prostitute, or to solicit in a public place. But the sale of sex has long been entirely legal in Canada.

The Supreme Court rejected those three pillars of the old rules, while at the same time giving Ottawa the green light to come up with new rules – but any new laws must take into account the dangers of sex work for sex workers. The Court found that, because prostitution is legal, Ottawa doesn’t have the constitutional right to regulate it in ways that make it more dangerous. “Parliament has the power to regulate against nuisances,” said a unanimous court, “but not at the cost of the health, safety and lives of prostitutes.”

Prostitutes were breaking the law if they kept a regular place of business, hired a receptionist or security guard, or vetted clients in a public place. And that, said the court, was making their lives a lot more dangerous.

So Ottawa can regulate prostitution; it just can’t regulate in ways that increase its hazards – because it’s a legal business. Which invites a question: What if the federal government made it illegal?

That’s the Nordic model, and it may be where the Conservative government is headed. The Nordic approach tries to shut the business down, by going after the customers rather than the sellers. Selling sex in the Nordic model is legal – but buying it is not. Proponents say that’s as it should be, because the exchange of sex for money, in their view, is inherently degrading, and many sex workers are selling because they have no other choice, for reasons of addiction, poverty or worse.

The approach is increasingly popular in Europe, where just this week the European Parliament passed a resolution recommending that all EU countries consider adopting the Nordic model. If the Conservative government were to pass a law along these lines, it would find itself with interesting bedfellows. The Nordic model is a darling of the left.

Then again, the prostitution debate makes for surprising partners: Those opposed to the Nordic approach are a mix of feminists, liberals and libertarians, some of whom believe that selling sex shouldn’t be stigmatized, and others who simply think that sex work is the oldest profession for a reason, namely because demand exists and always will. That’s the Dutch model: Make it legal and regulate it, like alcohol or strip clubs.

The Supreme Court didn’t give the government an instruction manual on which types of regulations might pass constitutional muster, and which will not. All the court said was that if sex work is regulated, it has to be done in such a way as to make it less dangerous for sex workers. That suggests something like the Dutch approach.

The idea of keeping prostitution legal, but regulating it differently than under current laws, has a compelling logic to it. But coming up with new rules won’t be easy.

Should Canadian cities have red-light districts, like Amsterdam? What if a city didn’t want one? Would prostitutes have to be licensed? Would they be allowed to run their business out of their homes or apartments? Or would they only be allowed to operate in areas zoned for this activity? And should any of this even involve the federal government and criminal law, or is this a question for provinces and municipalities to deal with through zoning, licensing and health laws? None of this will be simple or cheap; it might not even be effective. It will put new burdens on police, municipalities and public health officials. It is fraught with challenges.

The old rules were imperfect, but they did function. Striking them down was easy for the Supreme Court; replacing them, a job it left to politicians, will not be. What comes next could be a better system, though it is guaranteed to be messy and far from perfect. But to govern is to choose. And on balance, we believe that legalization and regulation, not criminalization, are the way to go

 

[canada-man]

cancer spreading to the U.K known as the nordic model

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/nordic-mod...ales-called-by-mp-gavin-shuker-report-1438676

 

[AK-47]

Evangelical Christian Gavin Shuker led the report into the Nordic model

I wanna punch this Gavin faggot in the face