The Nordic Model - We May Be Worse Off Than Before...

I've been hearing increasing calls for the Harper government to adopt the Nordic model to take the place of the prostitution laws which were struck down. The most disconcerting part of that is the reference to 'criminalizing the client' - more on that in a bit. However, it does sound a bit paradoxical. That is, brothels will now be legal, but the police will be arresting the clients at the desk as they pay!

Seriously though, if it will now be illegal to purchase the services of SPs, I must seriously ponder whether to continue on in this industry. I've always liked the fact that outcalls are legal. Therefore, I'm not breaking any laws. However, I'm sure the prospect of being arrested and charged if the Nordic model were to come into play would lead many hobbyists to second guess their involvement. No doubt, this type of legislation will undoubtedly be at the forefront of any debate the Conservatives have regarding what type of new laws to impose. I read an article the other day written by a law professor who stated that the Conservatives' only agenda will be not if, but how to criminalize prostitution. That said, what are the chances of the government going this route, and what can we do to ensure this does not come to pass?

It will be interesting to see how Harper responds. There is an insightful article in one of the weekend papers which points out that the conservatives live a bottom of 30% support (the base) and a top of 40%. The remaining 60% will never vote conservative. That 10% makes the difference between them being in majority government or in opposition. Right now they have lost most of that 10% and are looking at every way possible to regain it.

Thus they will think of this issue along two lines. First they will make the necessary noises about the evils of prostitution to appeal to the base. However they will also be keenly sensing where the remaining 10% sit.

I believe the abolitionists and strong supporters of the Nordic model lie in the 60% they aren't ever going to get to vote for them. There only interest will lie in this 10%.

What we have coming is a battle for the hearts and minds of Canadians. The threat of the Nordic model is very significant. Sex workers and their organizations need to start a very large public relations blitz. They need to say as loud as much as possible that the Nordic model will endanger them and cause a similar rejection of the laws by the Supreme Court. They need to educate the public on the extent of existing laws and their uses. They need to educate the public that the sex industry is far broader than human trafficing and underage girls.

If we as clients want to see this industry continue we can best serve by contributing to these various groups over this coming year. If the Nordic model does get enacted then like many others I'll be out of this business.

I agree very much that the battle is over and now the war is truly starting.

In light of the Supreme Court's reasoning, I don't think the Nordic Model is an option for Canada any more. It may be a political option, and many groups are advocating for it. In addition it superficially seems like a reasonable compromise to many people who don't know anything about the business. It is also appealing to people who just want to just "pull a solution off the shelf" and apply it without any thought. However, I don't think it will pass the standards which the Supreme Court has set. If the Nordic Model is used as the basis for new prostitution laws in Canada, the Supreme Court will likely strike them down too.

The underlying reasoning running through the Supreme Court's decision for throwing out the current prostitution laws is twofold. First, prostitution is legal and secondly, the current prostitution laws put sex workers at unreasonable risk of harm, especially street prostitutes.

Under the Nordic Model it is still legal to sell sexual services and sex workers would still be exposed to all of the same unreasonable risks as the current prostitution laws, especially those working in street prostitution.

If it becomes illegal to buy sexual services, it follows that sex workers can't have safe locations to provide the services such as brothels because clients can't go there. In addition it also follows that communication/screening, especially for street prostitutes, will have to be quick and cursory, (just as it is now) because their clients will be at risk of being charged. That continues to put sex worker's safety at risk.

Adopting the Nordic model just puts us back where we are now. It has the same flaws that at least two of the current prostitution laws (prohibiting brothels and public solicitation/communication) have.

We are taking some legal things as "natural" rights to start with. But we never asked ourselves who made those things legal. Prostitution is never legal universally. Just look down south and you will see that prostitution is illegal on moral grounds to start with.

Can this government incriminate prostitution itself? The answer is YES, if our elite representatives decided to do so, then they can make prostitution in itself illegal. Could this be challenged in a court, YES, it could but we need another Bedford.

The Nordic model could be camouflaged as a way to prevent exploitation. Where on earth would a 60 yrs old gentleman is expected to "naturally" date a beautiful girl in her 20s. If I were the conservative government I would move this way. The reason is simple, this model would be accepted by society since it is naturally prejudiced toward "unfaithful" men who seek prostitutes.

Additionally, clients have no assemblies to represent their interests and therefore are considered easy target to exert influence on. Prostitutes are doing it for living so they would have to fight for it, but clients are doing it as a luxury so they wont necessarily stand up for it.

Adopting the Nordic model just puts us back where we are now. It has the same flaws that at least two of the current prostitution laws (prohibiting brothels and public solicitation/communication) have.

To Canadian law, the Nordic model doesn't make a lot of sense. The model makes prostitution illegal but doesn't prosecute the seller, just the buyer. There would be no arguing that prostitution is a legal profession and deserving protection.

There however is another legal precedent that comes into play and that is the one on the safe-site injection where the Supreme Court also rules against the conservative. In this case drug users won the right to have a safe injection site despite that fact that they were breaking the law. The argument was they were vulnerable and the law against the site put them in greater risk.

This precedent could be very effectively argued for prostitutes under the Nordic model. There will always be vulnerable women entering prostitution. That is an indisputable fact. Criminalizing their clients would put them at risk which is counter to now several Supreme Court rulings.

However, I do feel the Harper government will start down this road anyway. I don't whether it would get through all committees and pass into legislation or whether it would get stopped. If it does make it into law then we may well go into a dark period while the law is again challenged and hopefully struck down. At that point the conservative may be able to say 'we tried', and then get on on with the business of passing some reasonable (or no laws).

I suspect it will be a long road.

Start looking at the ridiculous and completely outrageous statements being made by people like the Elizabeth Fry Society, The Coalition for Abolition of Prostitution etc. etc. They are going to get the press, they are going to be exploiting others to get their point across. And it is not all right wing, nor left wing. It is just not church groups etc. It is a broad spectrum of people who want to criminalize prostitution, and they have a lot of tools to make their point.

 

I too am surprised, disappointed and totally confused by Elizabeth Fry Society statements. Hopefully over the next year voices of reason will prevail. Where we are for the lack of a better word an "underground" community, it is difficult for us to get the word out. I wish there were easier ways some of the smart people here on CERB can be heard.

The Nordic model cannot be what replaces our current laws. The SCC struck down these three provisions because they infringed upon the safety and security of workers in a legal business. Implementing the Nordic model would be like telling construction workers they can do their jobs, but anyone purchasing the services of a construction worker could be arrested.

The major fundamental flaw with this analogy is that construction is looked upon as integral part of any nation's economy which is obviously approved on moral basis. Unfortunately, prostitution is not. Just take a sample of our obedient citizens and listen to their opinion about prostitution.

So if the Nordic model is implemented, it will be appealed under the same reasons, and likely be struck down under the same reasons.

Who will do the appealing? Clients or sex workers?

Who is the client that will spend several years of time and savings like Bedford et al instead of agreeing for plea of guilty in exchange of having having clear record just to keep the law away from the scrutiny of the courts, yet an effective intimidation tool.

And stop blaming it all on Harper. He is only one part of this equation, and quite frankly I think he would rather avoid the debate. It is a politicial minefield.

You're kidding, right? This whole thing is an early Christmas present for Harper, if anything! What better way to distract the media and voters from uncomfortable questions regarding senate fraud? And what, exactly, is the minefield for him? When he inevitably moves towards harsher laws (albeit with stronger internal logic to avoid further potential challenges), who among his supporters are going to take issue with him? What demographic of likely Tory voters will actually support decriminalization or legalization? And will that thin sliver of voters turn their vote on that single issue, or be MORE likely to support Harper because they have been distracted from the government's more worrisome issues? A freaking birthday and Christmas gift all rolled into one.

...you're right about not "blaming it all on Harper", mind you. But 'tis absurd to see this whole thing as anything but a massive windfall for him.

Even with all the arguments stating that the Nordic mode won't make it past the SC, I can't see the Tories or the Liberals letting it be fully legalized. Both will kick the can as many times as it takes.

Laws preventing access to abortion services; prohibiting same sex marriage; and prohibiting safe injection sites have all been struck down by the Supreme Court, despite moral arguments against all of them. They also can't be considered an "integral part of (the) nation's economy".

YES, but those cases had people who stood behind them. They fought until the end like Bedford et al. However, "John" is well known to be a discretion freak.

For some reason I think some of the arguments here are linking what is logical with what is doable:

Is the Nordic Model logical in the face of legal prostitution? No.

Is the Nordic Model Do-able by the current government? Yes

One last point. The Supreme Court's decision is in part based upon the fact that prostitution is currently legal. That raises the question of "What if you made prostitution illegal entirely?" The Court didn't comment on this. However, it's comment that "many prostitutes have no meaningful choice but to do so" suggests that they would take a very hard look at any law which criminalizes prostitution entirely. Their decisions on abortion and safe injection sites are examples where they threw out laws which criminalized an entire category of behaviour because the risks to the individual outweigh the benefit to society.

This re-enforce my point. Prostitutes, women seeking abortion services, drug addicts looking for safe injection sites proved to be able to stand for their cause. "John" still hasn't proven this and would have to earn it and not rely on the logic, or mercy of his enemy!

Until then, "John" is the weakest in this chain and with the least sympathy from society.

As Brenda Cossman, a law professor at the University of Toronto stated in an opinion piece in Sunday's Globe and Mail, "The Supreme Court of Canada was unanimous; our prostitution laws do more harm than good."

 

How will criminalizing prostitution entirely or adopting the Nordic Model get around this fact?

Unfortunately the same court suspended the declaration of invalidity for 1 year which means that with "absolutely" no criminal laws of any sort, serious harm might be suffered by society. Perfecto!

Workers can appeal the Nordic model should it be implemented, because it still puts workers of a legal profession at the same risks that the communication provision did.

In order to appeal something one must be convicted first. Under the Nordic model no sex worker will be prosecuted ever. Yes, sex workers organizations can intervene but only when the convicted chooses to fight back.

To my knowledge, to "commence" a challenge of any law, one must have standing. Having said that, one must understand that governments don't necessarily work on lawful grounds. There are many oppressive laws passed daily and governments betting is always on their unlimited resources to fight back any challenges.

In the case of the current challenge to the prostitution laws an "application to the courts" was made by Terri-Jean Bedford, Amy Lebovitch and Valerie Scott to have the prostitution laws declared invalid because they violate the Constitution. None of them were facing current charges. The courts will consider such "applications" if the issues raised are significant.

Bedford vs Canada is premised on a "private interest standing" granted to the applicants as the criminal provisions would "directly" affect the "three sex workers".

A private interest standing is not to be granted when the party is "indirectly" affected. A public interest standing is a wholly different issue and I believe that Bedford et al never sought such a standing and in my opinion they would have been denied such standing if requested.

Possibly sex workers groups can gain a public standing, but there is something different this time. They would have to show "evidence" that sex workers "in general" could be affected by such laws. Again evidence and not hearsay. For this evidence to accumulate: time, reports etc need to evolve.

It's safe to say that given the history of this case, the courts would consider another "application" to review any new prostitution laws and such an application could come from sex workers.

It is a fantasy, in my opinion, to presume that the Supreme Court will hear an application, even by hobbyists, immediately following a release of a new legislation. The reasonable thing is to give the legislation time to work first unless it incriminates sex workers as well, because Bedford et al can restore their standings.

Please note that I am not commenting here on the public perception of such an application when it comes from sex workers on behalf of their clients as it must be obvious.

Very good points Miss Jane. I'm not a lawyer but sex workers will see their incomes decimated, the quality of their clients drop dramatically and the dangers they face rise dramatically. Hopefully a good lawyer will find a way to gain standing to challenge the laws but I agree, it may take time and accumulation of evidence.

I don't see why this board isn't lit up with this discussion. Instead Sexy ABC's and other nonsense threads continue and threads like this one get scant attention. Let me be perfectly clear about what is going to happen.

First, the gov't will bring a Nordic style law. It isn't a matter of right or wrong but politics.

Second, once law, demand will drop dramatically. This will have several effects. First many working in this industry will lose so much business they will leave the industry. Unlike Sweden which introduced several social programs to ease the transition, don't expect anything like that here.

The size of this community will drop by at least half. Those providers that remain will face multiple challenges which will include dramatically dropping prices (due to drop in demand) along with significantly worse clients and these clients will push for more dangerous services like bbfs. Most of the clients dropping out will have been the good ones.

Third, the danger will increase. This will be because clients will resist screening and in general they will be more marginal members of society where the threat of a criminal record doesn't bother them as much.

Have no illusions, things will not continue as they are. The fact that some of us currently are laissez faire about things like a hotel room being a bawdy house don't really care because we know there is virtually zero chance of the cops busting into a hotel room with one girl and one client. Their legal grounds while existing, are minor and shakey. In the broader picture prostitution is legal and the cops want a decent working relationship so they just aren't doing these things. In the future that meeting could very well be with an undercover cop. No way I'm going to take that chance.

I would get into the discussion, but to be quite honest, there is a lot information to read and interpret,especially laws, for me to get into this discussion.

I am however getting some great intel from links provided in news section and as well threads in the general section.

As oppose to coming out and commenting on an issue, without knowing a good amount of the details, I will remain from the sidelines, and read and reserve my comment until afterwards.

I would however like to thank those that have stepped up to the plate,by informing all of us, on an issue that is news breaking and vitally important moving forward for everyone involved.

 

I don't see why this board isn't lit up with this discussion. Instead Sexy ABC's and other nonsense threads continue and threads like this one get scant attention. Let me be perfectly clear about what is going to happen.

 

Have you ever heard the phrase "It is better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt."?

That pretty much sums up why I haven't chimed in. I simply don't know enough about the laws and legalities or most likely step the government will take to add anything to what others have been saying. I'd be posting just to hear myself speak...er...type.

Like PistolPete (and I'm sure many others) I'm certainly very interested and am appreciative of the varied points and articles that others have been sharing. It's been a help and I hope it continues.

As for those "nonsense threads", this issue isn't going to solve itself over night. That seems to be the one thing that everyone agrees on! It's unrealistic to expect the rest of the board to shutdown until it does, or to imagine that people can't still have some lighthearted fun even with such uncertainly going on. Indeed, if anything it's when people are worried about the future that sometimes they need a bit of silly. :)

Anyway, I don't want to distract from the thread - just clarify that silence does not mean disinterest and I'll certainly continue to follow the conversation and appreciate those sharing their own ideas and information.

I don't see why this board isn't lit up with this discussion. Instead Sexy ABC's and other nonsense threads continue and threads like this one get scant attention. Let me be perfectly clear about what is going to happen... the gov't will bring a Nordic style law... Have no illusions, things will not continue as they are. The fact that some of us currently are laissez faire about things like a hotel room being a bawdy house don't really care because we know there is virtually zero chance of the cops busting into a hotel room with one girl and one client. Their legal grounds while existing, are minor and shakey. In the broader picture prostitution is legal and the cops want a decent working relationship so they just aren't doing these things. In the future that meeting could very well be with an undercover cop. No way I'm going to take that chance.

You took the words right out of my mouth.

Recent studies have shown that the Nordic Model has not made prostitution any safer than before. In fact, some Swedish politicians are calling for its repeal becasue of this. As a result, I am doubtful that it would alleviate the constitutional issue of prostitute safety. The Supreme Court ruling has put the Canadian government in a real bind where regulation would be the best legal path, but one frought with political landmines.

The Nordic model cannot be what replaces our current laws. The SCC struck down these three provisions because they infringed upon the safety and security of workers in a legal business. Implementing the Nordic model would be like telling construction workers they can do their jobs, but anyone purchasing the services of a construction worker could be arrested. Criminalizing clients does nothing to address the dangers faced by workers; in fact, it would likely increase these risks as criminalized clients would not likely be willing to undergo screening. So if the Nordic model is implemented, it will be appealed under the same reasons, and likely be struck down under the same reasons.

"Feminists" (read: abolitionists) who want to "save the women and punish the pimps/johns" ignores the fact that there are men and trans* people who are workers, and there are women and trans* people who are clients. Criminalizing clients is not the way to go. We as workers do not want this.

 

As to this talk of workers who are being pimped/exploited/against their will -- we have laws against human trafficking and forcible confinement and exploitation of minors. We do not need laws specific to sex work addressing these issues because we already have laws against them. There are plenty of other employments where workers are trafficked or exploited, and we do not have laws specific to those employments (domestic care/services being a big one).

The Nordic model is an abolitionist one. They don't want to make prostitution safer, they want it to cease to exist. Their view is that prostitution is inherently abusive towards women, so they are victims from the moment they enter the industry. Separation between good and bad johns are irrelevant - you pay for sex, you're committing an act of violence against women. That's how it will be sold, and it will be an easy sell for lots of reasons.

For one, sex trafficking, exploitation and abuse do exist everywhere, so painting with a broad brush is not difficult when they can pull examples of the "sex industry" from every city. For another, it's not like the clients will be marching in the streets in support of their right to cheat on their wives. Legal or not, for the vast majority of us discretion is absolutely necessary. That leaves the sex workers themselves, against an array of human rights activists, NIMBY groups, organizations fighting international sex trafficking, feminists...not to mention a government desperate to change the channel from their own scandals and which needs to increase their voting share among women.

Make no mistake, some kind of law along these lines is coming. It goes without saying that Cerb and sites like it can't survive that in its current form, since the client side of the equation will be illegal. Enjoy it while you can, keeping in mind that the police will have access to all information maintained front and back end.

For one, sex trafficking, exploitation and abuse do exist everywhere, so painting with a broad brush is not difficult when they can pull examples of the "sex industry" from every city. For another, it's not like the clients will be marching in the streets in support of their right to cheat on their wives. Legal or not, for the vast majority of us discretion is absolutely necessary. That leaves the sex workers themselves, against an array of human rights activists, NIMBY groups, organizations fighting international sex trafficking, feminists...not to mention a government desperate to change the channel from their own scandals and which needs to increase their voting share among women.

From the way I see it evolving in this forum, some hobbyists might be putting their hope on sex workers to do the street marching on their behalf. ;)

Putting the joke aside, finally some pragmatism is surfacing lately in this thread. I do, however, have some optimistic views about the long term effects of the Nordic model. While not perfect, I think it is amenable to adaptation.

The Nordic model is an abolitionist one. They don't want to make prostitution safer, they want it to cease to exist. Their view is that prostitution is inherently abusive towards women, so they are victims from the moment they enter the industry. Separation between good and bad johns are irrelevant - you pay for sex, you're committing an act of violence against women. That's how it will be sold, and it will be an easy sell for lots of reasons.

 

For one, sex trafficking, exploitation and abuse do exist everywhere, so painting with a broad brush is not difficult when they can pull examples of the "sex industry" from every city. For another, it's not like the clients will be marching in the streets in support of their right to cheat on their wives. Legal or not, for the vast majority of us discretion is absolutely necessary. That leaves the sex workers themselves, against an array of human rights activists, NIMBY groups, organizations fighting international sex trafficking, feminists...not to mention a government desperate to change the channel from their own scandals and which needs to increase their voting share among women.

 

Make no mistake, some kind of law along these lines is coming. It goes without saying that Cerb and sites like it can't survive that in its current form, since the client side of the equation will be illegal. Enjoy it while you can, keeping in mind that the police will have access to all information maintained front and back end.

This is a pretty sobering thought. It appears that not everyone on the board is getting this message, as some still believe that having the laws struck down is a good thing - While it is in theory, the Harper government will use it to its advantage by drafting draconian laws that will serve to advance their own conservative agenda. The loss of Cerb would be a huge blow to a lot of people, SPs and hobbyists alike. It looks like we're all going to get screwed, and not in a good way!