Bill C-36 Media Watchlist - you can help!

Consistent with her position on C-36, Elizabeth May, leader of the Green Party, has just introduced to the House of Commons motions which would in effect get rid of the Bill as a whole:

http://www.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?Pub=NoticeOrder&Mode=1&Language=E&Parl=41&Ses=2&File=12

Anyone interested in following the progress of the Bill, can track it here:

http://www.parl.gc.ca/LEGISInfo/BillDetails.aspx?Language=E&Mode=1&billId=6635303

Hamilton SIU to investigate Hamilton cop who preyed on sex workers Sept. 15/14

Ottawa Ottawa mayor candidate Darren Wood: legalize bordellos, tax sex workers Sept. 11/14

Vancouver East Liberals will host town hall meeting on Bill C-36, which criminalizes prostitution

by CHARLIE SMITH on SEP 22, 2014 at 4:57 PM

http://www.straight.com/news/734206/vancouver-east-liberals-will-host-town-hall-meeting-bill-c-36-which-criminalizes-prostitution

MORE THAN THREE months ago, I suggested that Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau was the only hope for sex workers.

It came in the wake of the Conservative government unveiling Bill C-36, which criminalizes the customers of sex workers.

Some commenters on this website ripped into me for suggesting that Trudeau would do this. After all, Trudeau has previously supported the Nordic model, which also criminalizes the client.

My response is that Trudeau changed his views on marijuana.

There's no reason he wouldn't reverse his position on prostitution if there were sufficient public support and if evidence led the Liberals in that direction.

The research by SFU's John Lowman and others is already clear. Sex workers' lives are jeopardized when the state drives their industry underground.

That's why the Supreme Court of Canada concluded that Criminal Code prohibitions on soliciting clients in public, keeping a common bawdy house, and living off the avails of prostitution are unconstitutional.

The government's response, Bill C-36, might as well be called the Willie Pickton Law. That's because it will make it easier for predators to kill sex workers after the Harperites have once again pushed sex workers to the margins.

I'm surprised that Justice Minister Peter MacKay would countenance something like this, but who knows what's going on his brain?

This week, the Vancouver East Liberals have announced that they will host a town hall meeting on Bill C-36. It suggests that the party has an open mind on this issue.

Door open at 6:30 p.m. at the Strathcona Community Centre on Thursday (September 25).

The panel features sex-workers' advocate Jamie Lee Hamilton, Vancouver park commissioner Sarah Blyth, and UBC researcher Becki Ross.

It's taking place in the riding of NDP MP Libby Davies, who's long been an advocate for increasing sex workers' safety.

In 2002, Davies introduced a motion in Parliament to review prostitution laws. That was the same year that Pickton was charged with 26 murders.

Late last year, Davies issued a statement welcoming the Supreme Court of Canada's ruling striking down three sections of the Criminal Code.

"The exploitation, murder and violence against sex trade workers in Canada happens at an alarming rate, and until today, the laws dealing with prostitution remained unchanged and governments remained unwilling to realistically deal with this growing public safety issue," she said. "These laws have been a failure, both from the perspective of assisting and protecting sex workers as well as in mitigating the impacts of street prostitution on local communities."

Davies also spoke at a rally this year opposing Bill C-36.

So why is Justin Trudeau and not NDP leader Tom Mulcair the only hope for sex workers?

It's because most of Davies' colleagues in Parliament have been silent on this issue. And if the NDP forms government, there's no guarantee that it will reverse the criminalization of customers and other unconstitutional aspects of Bill C-36 until Mulcair delivers an unequivocal statement on this issue.

It's fine and dandy for him to stand up in Parliament and put the government's feet to the fire with regard to Senate expenses. But Bill C-36 is legislation that will result in people dying unnecessarily. Why isn't the Opposition leader putting as much energy into this?

In the meantime, the federal Liberals are seeking public input. That's the first step along the road to developing better policies.

It's why I still believe that Justin Trudeau is the only hope for sex workers.

Follow Charlie Smith on Twitter @csmithstraight.

*****************************

May says prostitution bill is 'unfixable'

http://www.torontosun.com/2014/09/22/may-says-prostitution-bill-is-unfixable

OTTAWA -- Green Party Leader Elizabeth May said the government prostitution Bill C-36 is "unfixable."

"I couldn't find a way to amend the bill and actually fix it," she said, recommending the bill be ditched entirely.

The controversial legislation was back to the House of Commons for a final review Monday, so opposition MPs from all parties had one final chance to weigh in.

The Supreme Court last December ruled Canada's existing laws on the world's oldest profession were unconstitutional and ordered Parliament to come up with something new.

Initiated by Justice Minister Peter MacKay, the overarching theme behind the bill is to criminalize the purchase of sex, but not its sale.

Though he's been criticized for it, MacKay has stated he believes his "made-in-Canada" approach is the best step toward the "aspirational" goal of eliminating prostitution altogether.

According to Françoise Boivin, from the NDP, the next steps for C-36 are few hours of debate on Friday for the 3rd reading, and then final vote at the Hoc next week:

#C36 Vote étape du rapport. Ne restera que quelques hrs de débat en 3ième lecture vendredi et vote la semaine prochaine. #polcan #Bedford

https://twitter.com/FBoivinNPD/statu...18774603759616

A motion, at the Report Stage, to delete the Bill was just defeated by the Cons.

https://twitter.com/Mercedes_Allen/s...19738727055360

Third reading of Bill C-36 today.

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

Bill C-36 passes third reading in the House by a vote of 156 to 124.

Next step: the Senate

If you want notifications sent directly to your email (not that this is ever a good idea unless you are working on a project or something else), try setting up google notifications.

<Zoom up to 30,000 feet>

I'm sitting here literally blinking back tears after spending a lot of time this morning reading about the C-36 law, and the very thoughtful, logical posts on this board, including the quoted comments by the CBA.

Yes, the law is unjust and I have many issues with it, and the horse it rode in on.

But, wow. Here I sit, in Vancouver, and all around me including thousands of miles towards the east, is a massive network of bright sparks -- benevolent, thoughtful, logical, reasonable and articulate people.

Having lived in many other countries, I can really appreciate the contrast. I'm proud to be here.

</zoom>

<Zoom up to 30,000 feet>

 

I'm sitting here literally blinking back tears after spending a lot of time this morning reading about the C-36 law, and the very thoughtful, logical posts on this board, including the quoted comments by the CBA.

 

Yes, the law is unjust and I have many issues with it, and the horse it rode in on.

 

But, wow. Here I sit, in Vancouver, and all around me including thousands of miles towards the east, is a massive network of bright sparks -- benevolent, thoughtful, logical, reasonable and articulate people.

 

Having lived in many other countries, I can really appreciate the contrast. I'm proud to be here.

 

</zoom>

Hey tanya - I'm in the Fraser Valley, just a couple hours east of you. Lots of BC industry people here on cerb. It's good to be part of an online community of like-minded people.

In an effort to help everyone stay updated on the Political/Legal issues affecting the Canadian Escort Industry, we're asking for your help in listing Media Items.

Please post links to any Industry-related items such as:

• Articles regarding Backpages, Craigslist Therapeutics and other Escort Advertising venues.
  
• Updates regarding changes other Industry Forums have made in response to the new laws.
  
• Statements from Police Services in major cities regarding how they plan to interpret and enforce the new laws.
  
• Items regarding Police stings, arrests and court cases.
  

Not sure if this op-ed, which appears in today's G&M, counts. But I thought it worthwhile to note, as it was written by Angela Campbell, an associate professor in the Faculty of Law, McGill University. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-debate/we-condemn-attacks-on-women-at-work-unless-its-sex-work/article21533142/

The reality is the law is now on the books and we are all vulnerable to it in different ways. For Clients the risks are prosecution and jail time, for providers the risks are personal safety as screening becomes very difficult and loss of business as clients limit activities or "retire".

I predicted this result when the original SC decision struck down the laws (always thought the petitioners were misguided and should have left well enough alone as the religious right was always going to bring in a more restrictive set of laws) you can even go back and look in the thread.

Whilst there is an encouraging level of opposition in some political camps don't hold your breath waiting for the laws to be changed.

If the Conservatives win re-election obviously nothing will change without another court challenge. If the Liberals win I think the same holds true. Most polls show Canadians oppose the legislation but it is not a priority issue. A new government will not expend energy or political capital on this issue no matter how much it matters to all of us.

It seems the only chance of reform will be another court challenge. The problem here is that requires a client willing to take a personal conviction and make it into a public crusade. The vast majority of clients who will be charged under this law will not be interested in pursuing this route. They will simply want the charge dealt with as quietly as possible. SC challenges normally require a person willing to engage in a fight for justice sacrificing privacy and resources in a process which at best has an uncertain outcome.

Different police forces will make their own decisions about what resources to devote to this. Many will make it a low priority and probably still focus on the street with the main change being they will be arresting clients instead of providers. However that doesn't mean that more upscale services won't be immune. All clients must now know that every time they see a provider they are breaking the law in a way they were not previously. It is a new environment that should give pause.

For providers screening will become increasingly difficult as clients are naturally going to have tremendous incentive to remain anonymous.

We're in an new era and only time will tell for sure but one thing that remains certain is that the oldest profession will go on as surely as night leads to day.