An Act to amend the Criminal Code (exploitation and trafficking in persons)

This bill was last introduced in the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session, which ended in August 2015.

This bill was previously introduced in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session.

Sponsor

Maria Mourani  Bloc

Introduced as a private member’s bill.

Status

This bill has received Royal Assent and is now law.

Summary

This is from the published bill. The Library of Parliament often publishes better independent summaries.

This enactment amends the Criminal Code in order to provide consecutive sentences for offences related to trafficking in persons and create a presumption regarding the exploitation of one person by another.
It also adds the offence of trafficking in persons to the list of offences to which the forfeiture of proceeds of crime apply.

Elsewhere

All sorts of information on this bill is available at LEGISinfo, an excellent resource from the Library of Parliament. You can also read the full text of the bill.

Votes

March 6, 2013 Passed That the Bill be now read a second time and referred to the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights.

Criminal CodePrivate Members' Business

March 10th, 2023 / 1:40 p.m.
See context

Bloc

Gabriel Ste-Marie Bloc Joliette, QC

Madam Speaker, before I begin my speech, I want to commend the hon. parliamentary secretary for giving so much of his speech in French. That takes effort and the results speak for themselves. I want to congratulate him on that.

This bill “amends the Criminal Code to specify what constitutes exploitation for the purpose of establishing whether a person has committed the offence of trafficking in persons.” As my hon. colleague from Saint-Jean said a few sitting days ago, the Bloc Québécois supports the principle of this bill.

It is imperative that we discuss all of the tools that could help authorities combat this scourge, which is getting worse with population movement and the growing number of refugees. This bill also responds to the demands of several human trafficking survivors' groups and would make the definitions of exploitation and human trafficking more consistent with those set out in the Palermo protocol, which Canada signed at the beginning of the millennium.

The bill is very simple but very important. It removes a phrase from the Criminal Code so that an accusation under these provisions must be based on the fact that the victim believes that a refusal on their part would threaten their safety or the safety of someone known to them.

According to the International Justice and Human Rights Clinic at the faculty of law at the University of British Columbia, asking victims to demonstrate that they have reasonable grounds to fear for their safety may be an obstacle to obtaining convictions for human trafficking.

Elements of the offence of human trafficking are more difficult to prove than those of other similar offences. For example, the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, which prohibits human trafficking, does not require the person involved to prove that they fear for their safety. This standard is no longer appropriate.

Let us look at the chronology of legislation against human trafficking. In 2002, Canada ratified the Palermo protocol, a “protocol to prevent, suppress and punish trafficking in persons, especially women and children, supplementing the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime”.

Article 3 clearly defines trafficking in persons as follows:

“Trafficking in persons” shall mean the recruitment, transportation, transfer, harbouring or receipt of persons, by means of the threat or use of force or other forms of coercion, of abduction, of fraud, of deception, of the abuse of power or of a position of vulnerability or of the giving or receiving of payments or benefits to achieve the consent of a person having control over another person, for the purpose of exploitation. Exploitation shall include, at a minimum, the exploitation of the prostitution of others or other forms of sexual exploitation, forced labour or services, slavery or practices similar to slavery, servitude or the removal of organs . . . .

That is the definition.

That is how human trafficking came to be added to the Criminal Code in 2005. The Canadian definition, however, is different from the Palermo Protocol definition in that the issue of consent or the victim's sense of safety is taken into consideration. Thus, the victim must prove that they were in danger if they refused to be exploited.

In human trafficking cases, regardless of whether the victims were initially willing or felt safe, victims should never have to justify the circumstances under which they were lured into the situation in order to prove they were trafficked. Human trafficking is not limited to sexual exploitation, as we have already heard. Traffickers exploit their victims in many ways, including for forced labour. It is important to remember, for example, that even if victims did consent to come to Canada, they did not consent to the forced labour or sexual exploitation to which they may have been subjected afterwards, especially if they end up being dependent on someone because of isolation, lack of resources or language barriers.

Section 118 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, passed in 2002, makes it a criminal offence to “organize the coming into Canada of one or more persons by means of abduction, fraud, deception or use or threat of force or coercion”. Although human trafficking and human smuggling are two different concepts, the act also prohibits human smuggling into Canada.

In 2005, Bill C-49 added three offences related to human trafficking to the Criminal Code, as well as a definition. The offences include trafficking in persons; receiving a financial or other material benefit from the commission or facilitation of trafficking in persons; withholding or destroying a person's identity documents, such as a passport, whether authentic or not, for the purpose of committing or facilitating trafficking in persons; and exploiting another person in the context of trafficking in persons offences.

In 2008-09, the first case involving a charge of human trafficking under the new law was ruled on in adult criminal court.

In fall 2008, a 20-year-old woman went to Peel Regional Police to report that a 22-year-old Ontario man named Vytautas Vilutis was using intimidation and threats to sexually exploit her. She said that she made $10,000 for him in just a few weeks through online Craigslist classified ads. She added that he took her phone calls, set up her “dates” and kept track of her appointments, so he knew how much money she owed him each morning. It was not until he threatened her for not leaving all the cash out for him one morning that she reported him to police. Vytautas Vilutis pleaded guilty in April 2009 to charges of human trafficking and receiving a material benefit from human trafficking.

He was convicted under both provisions and was the first person in Canada to be convicted for benefiting from human trafficking. In 2010, another section was added to the Criminal Code, setting out a mandatory minimum sentence for persons charged with trafficking of persons under 18. That was Bill C‑268.

In 2012, the Criminal Code was amended to allow the prosecution of Canadians and permanent residents for the offence of trafficking in persons committed outside Canada, and added factors that judges may consider when determining whether exploitation occurred. That was Bill C‑310.

In 2015, mandatory minimum sentences were imposed for the main trafficking in persons offence, receiving a material benefit from the proceeds of child trafficking, and withholding or destroying documents to facilitate child trafficking. Bill C‑452 was put forward by my political party.

In 2019, the Hon. Ralph Goodale, Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness, released the national strategy to combat human trafficking 2019‑24. With $75 million in funding over 6 years, this strategy followed the Palermo protocol. The national strategy to combat human trafficking 2019‑24 was adapted from the previous five-year plan.

It was adapted due to some deficiencies identified during policy assessment, namely that most of the resources were being allocated to the fight against sexual exploitation whereas forced labour is a growing issue. This is nothing new, but it is being increasingly recognized and discussed.

Bill S-224 is part of a long legislative quest to combat human trafficking, which is extremely important. In closing, I would like to paraphrase author Ralph Champavert and say that the stigma of human trafficking will disappear when the sun of human dignity rises in all hearts.

Human TraffickingPetitionsRoutine Proceedings

November 30th, 2018 / 12:05 p.m.
See context

Bloc

Monique Pauzé Bloc Repentigny, QC

Mr. Speaker, this week again I am presenting a petition calling on the Prime Minister to sign the order to bring into force Bill C-452 to crack down on pimps. Last week, I presented e-petitions. Today, I am presenting a paper petition signed by 649 petitioners. How many young girls have suffered from this government's complacency on this file? Again, we are calling on the Prime Minister to pick up his pen and sign the order. That is four times now that we have asked for that.

JusticeOral Questions

November 23rd, 2018 / noon
See context

Bloc

Rhéal Fortin Bloc Rivière-du-Nord, QC

Mr. Speaker, since this government took office in 2015, it has been dragging its feet and refusing to crack down on pimps. Bill C-452, which would require pimps to serve consecutive prison sentences for their crimes, received royal assent three years ago. Prevention and intervention are not enough. Punitive measures and deterrents are needed to protect our young people, but no, it seems this government would rather protect their abusers.

After three years of dilly-dallying, will the Prime Minister finally decide to sign the order to bring Bill C-452 into force?

Criminal CodeGovernment Orders

November 20th, 2018 / 4:35 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Arnold Viersen Conservative Peace River—Westlock, AB

Mr. Speaker, I am not sure what point my colleague is trying to make. However, he talked about the legislative agenda to some degree, and one of the things I can talk about in that regard is that a former colleague of his, the NDP member Maria Mourani, introduced a bill over five years ago. That bill was passed in a previous Parliament and was to come into force. The Liberals said they were going to bring it into force. That was five years ago. It is finally being addressed in this particular bill. While most of the tools in her bill, Bill C-452, are coming in, the Liberals have removed consecutive sentencing from the bill. While to some degree that proves that the human trafficking angle is definitely a non-partisan thing, it is also very frustrating that the Liberals cannot get on board with it.

Criminal CodeGovernment Orders

November 20th, 2018 / 11:25 a.m.
See context

Liberal

Randy Boissonnault Liberal Edmonton Centre, AB

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my support for Bill C-75. I would like to use my time today to discuss the proposed changes to this bill that would affect the LGBTQ2 community, human trafficking and the victim surcharge.

As special adviser to the Prime Minister on LGBTQ2 issues, I am particularly proud of the work of our government in advancing the rights of LBGTQ2 Canadians and the work of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights in making concrete, tangible legislative changes that would improve the lives of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer and two-spirit Canadians.

Today, on the the International Transgender Day of Remembrance, when we pause to reflect on the lives of transgender people here in Canada and around the world that have been lost to murder, suicide, hatred and discrimination; the lives diminished due to overt transphobia and misogyny; and the daily discrimination faced by trans children, siblings, parents and their loved ones, I am proud, as the first openly gay MP elected from Alberta to the House, that Parliament passed Bill C-16 to protect trans persons in the Criminal Code and the Canadian Human Rights Act. I am particularly proud that our government led this charge.

I am also proud of the work of our government in passing legislation to enable Canadians who have criminal records for same-sex consensual activity to have these records expunged, and I acknowledge the leadership of the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness on this file.

I would also like to thank the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada for including in Bill C-75 the removal of section 159, which discriminates against young gay or bisexual men. That would now be removed from the Criminal Code with the passing of Bill C-75.

I also applaud the work of the committee and the ministry in responding to expert testimony for the repeal of the bawdy house and vagrancy provisions that were used by police forces to arrest gay men who frequented gay clubs and bathhouses. Men arrested in these police raids, many now in their 60s, 70s and 80s, still face criminal records as a result of these charges. We heard the testimony, and the committee and the ministry responded. Should Bill C-75 pass, these odious provisions in the Criminal Code would be removed and amends could thus be made.

Parts of the bill pertain to human trafficking and the victim surcharge.

I think it is very important to clearly state that human trafficking cannot be tolerated and that our government sees it as a very serious concern. That is why we continue to work closely with the provinces, territories, law enforcement agencies, victim services groups, organizations representing indigenous peoples, and other community groups, as well as our international partners. We are working together to combat all forms of human trafficking in Canada and abroad, to provide victims with special protection and support, to bring the perpetrators of these crimes to justice and to ensure that their punishment reflects the severity of the crime.

Human trafficking is a very difficult crime to detect because of its clandestine nature and victims' reluctance to report their situations out of fear of their traffickers. We heard testimony about that when the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights travelled across the country to listen to victims of human trafficking and to see how we could change the Criminal Code to provide more opportunities for police to work with those organizations that work with victims.

The legislative changes within Bill C-75 would provide police and prosecutors with additional tools for investigation and prosecution. These measures would bring the perpetrators of human trafficking to justice so they can answer for the severity of their actions.

The amendments proposed in Bill C-38 would bring into force amendments that have already been passed by Parliament, but were not promulgated in the former parliamentary initiative, Bill C-452. They would also strengthen the legislation to combat all forms of human trafficking, whether through sexual exploitation or forced labour, while respecting the rights and freedoms guaranteed in our Constitution.

We heard of heinous crimes being committed not just against those who are unknown to the perpetrators, but also against family members. Family trafficking exists in this country, and we must make sure that police forces are armed with the tools they need to be able to put an end to such heinous crimes.

More specifically, the proposed changes will make it easier to prosecute human trafficking offences by introducing a presumption that will enable the Crown to prove that the accused exercised control, direction or influence over the victim's movements by establishing that the accused lived with or was habitually in the company of the victim.

In addition, these changes would add human trafficking to the list of offences to which the provisions imposing a reverse onus for forfeiture of proceeds of crime apply.

I would now like to discuss the changes that would affect the victim surcharge. Bill C-75 proposes to restore judicial discretion to waive the victim surcharge by guiding judges to waive the victim surcharge only when the offender is truly unable to pay. For certain offences against the administration of justice, where the total amount would be disproportionate in certain circumstances, the bill would also provide for limited judicial discretion to not impose a federal victim surcharge amount per offence.

The federal victim surcharge, which is set out in the Criminal Code, is imposed on a sentencing basis, and revenue is collected and used by the province or territory where the criminal act was committed to assist in the sentencing process for funding victims services. Bill C-75 would maintain that the federal victim surcharge must be imposed ex officio and must apply cumulatively to each offence. However, to address concerns about the negative impact of current federal victim surcharge provisions on marginalized offenders, the bill would provide limited judicial discretion regarding the mandatory and cumulative imposition of the surcharge in certain circumstances.

Bill C-75 would provide clear direction as to what would constitute undue hardship. These guidelines would ensure that the mandatory exemption, or waiver, would be applied consistently and only to offenders who were truly unable to pay the surcharge. In addition, the bill would state that undue hardship would refer to the financial ability to pay and was not simply caused by harm associated with incarceration. We are trying to avoid the criminalization and over-criminalization of people simply because of their inability to pay a federal victim surcharge.

For certain offences against the justice administration, in the event that the cumulative surcharge was disproportionate to the circumstances, Bill C-75 would contain provisions allowing an exception to the victim fine surcharge ratio. This exception would apply to two types of offences against the administration of justice: failure to appear in court; and breach of conditions of bail by a peace officer or court order, and only when said breach did not cause any moral, bodily or financial damage to the victim.

Studies show that marginalized offenders, especially indigenous offenders and offenders with mental health and addiction issues, are more likely to be found guilty of offences against the administration of justice.

Under the existing victim surcharge provisions, it is unlikely that much of the money collected in the federal victim surcharges that are paid out to the provinces and territories comes from groups of offenders who are unable to pay the victim surcharge or who are only able to pay part of the surcharge because of their personal situation or because of their multiple offences against the administration of justice.

In addition, offenders who suffer undue hardship as a result of the mandatory victim surcharge are, by the current application of the provisions, hampered in their ability to regain financial stability. This places them in a situation where the surcharge does not allow them to successfully reintegrate into society after serving their sentences or paying their outstanding fines, and they risk reoffending. These types of situations do not help survivors or victims of crime or the provision of services to help them. This proposed exception would be consistent with the principles of fairness and equity.

I am confident that by maintaining a higher mandatory surcharge, this proposed legislation would support the objective of the victim surcharge to provide a source of funding for provincial and territorial victim services while strengthening offender accountability regarding victims and society in general. At the same time, the bill would be in keeping with the principles of proportionality, fairness and respect for the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Not having gone through law school, I can say that it is an honour to serve on this committee and to be part of making Bill C-75 appear in the House today.

Human TraffickingPetitionsRoutine Proceedings

November 20th, 2018 / 10:05 a.m.
See context

Bloc

Monique Pauzé Bloc Repentigny, QC

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to table petition e-1673 on behalf of the Association féminine d'éducation et d'action sociale, better known as Afeas. The petition was signed by 639 people, and more signatures will soon be arriving on paper. This petition calls on the government to sign the order to bring into force Bill C-452, which seeks to combat human trafficking and sexual exploitation.

We are losing precious time. The bill was passed unanimously and has already received royal assent. Other petitions on this subject have been circulated over the past three and a half years, and the Quebec National Assembly passed a unanimous motion in this regard.

How long will it take and how many young girls will have to become victims before the Prime Minister signs the petition?

The purpose of the petition is to get the government to sign the order to protect teenage girls from criminal prostitution rings.

Corrections and Conditional Release ActGovernment Orders

October 18th, 2018 / 5:20 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Sylvie Boucher Conservative Beauport—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île d’Orléans—Charlevoix, QC

Mr. Speaker, I rise in the House today to speak to Bill C-83, an act to amend the Corrections and Conditional Release Act and another act.

I do so because I have a duty to give a voice to the victims of crime and their loved ones here in the House because, ever since the Liberals came to power in 2015, the voice of the people has been growing weaker and weaker and their rights are being increasingly trampled.

The Canadian justice system is not perfect. A lot of work remains to be done to make it better, fair and equitable, and to ensure that it upholds the rights of victims of crime and their families. There is still a lot of work to do to make victims' rights equivalent to the rights of criminals.

Fortunately, the previous Conservative government took an honest look at the imbalances that persisted for many long years.

The excellent work done by former prime minister Stephen Harper for the advancement and respect of the rights of victims of crime resulted in the creation of the position of federal ombudsman for victims of crime, an end to prisoners serving only one-sixth of their sentence, the drafting of Bill C-452 to support victims of procuring, minimum penalties for certain sexual offences, a financial compensation program for parents whose children are missing or killed as a result of a criminal offence, a review of the faint hope clause bill and, finally, the victim surcharge bill.

Since 2015, the government across the aisle has not passed a single piece of legislation to support victims. Worse still, it has not introduced a single bill to improve the lives of victims of crime.

On top of that, even though the House unanimously voted in favour of Bill C-452 in June 2015, the government has backtracked and still refuses to sign the order in council to implement the act, which would protect young girls from sexual exploitation. It claims that the bill is too harsh on pimps.

The Liberals also want to eliminate the mandatory minimums in some acts. Further evidence that the Liberals would much rather support criminals than victims is that they took nearly a year to appoint a new federal ombudsman for victims of crime, but the new federal ombudsman for offenders was appointed in less than a month. Furthermore, they voted against my private member's bill, Bill C-343, which would have made the position of ombudsman for victims of crime the same level of authority as the corrections one.

Now, with Bill C-83, the government continues on its path, seeking to punish criminals as little as possible, even the most dangerous, aggressive criminals who pose serious risks to the safety of other offenders and corrections officers. The government wants to stop placing inmates in segregation, commonly known as the hole.

I must say that, these days, being sent to the hole is not the same thing as before. I come from a family that worked in the prison system for a long time, so I know what I am talking about. My father was a prison warden and my mother was a prison guard.

The Minister of Public Safety wants to replace the administrative segregation cells reserved for the most dangerous and problematic offenders with structured intervention units, which would separate these offenders from the rest of the prison population, when necessary, but continue to give them access to rehabilitation programs, interventions and mental health care.

We all agree that mental health issues must be treated. However, we also all agree that, when inmates are in solitary confinement, it is because they are endangering the lives of others. Because of that, I will have to vote against this bill. For me, victims of crime come well before criminals themselves.

September 24th, 2018 / 8:25 p.m.
See context

Criminologist and Sociologist, President of Mouranie-Criminologie, As an Individual

Maria Mourani

Certainly.

As to the recommendations, let me repeat what victims and the police told me. Victims are waiting for Bill C-452 to come into force, which received royal assent in 2015. For three years, the government has refused to bring this law into force.

Having been a minister, Mr. Clement, you know that it takes more than a day for a ministerial order to be issued to bring a law into force. As you also know, the House voted unanimously twice, at second reading and at third reading of this bill. Even Mr. Trudeau, who is now the prime minister, voted for the bill.

The current Minister of Justice says Bill C-36 would create problems for consecutive sentences. I would like to take the opportunity to congratulate the previous government for passing this major piece of legislation on prostitution. You will recall that Bill C-36 received royal assent on November 6, 2014, while Bill C-245 received royal assent on June 18, 2015, nearly a year later.

Everyone voted for it. Why does Mr. Trudeau seem to be changing his mind now that he is prime minister? Victims are very frustrated by this, especially families with children who have run away or who are in prostitution networks, and who are told by police officers that they cannot take action without testimony or a complaint, even in the case of girls who are minors. The government must declare this act to be in force immediately without waiting for Bill C-75 to be passed or receive royal assent.

September 24th, 2018 / 8 p.m.
See context

Criminologist and Sociologist, President of Mouranie-Criminologie, As an Individual

Maria Mourani

Very well. I will conclude.

My last point is about the need for sentences to be made stricter by introducing consecutive sentences. That is the objective of the amendments to the Criminal Code contained in Bill C-452. However, those amendments must be given effect by order in council, and the government is the entity that must do that. Unfortunately, I don't have enough time left to explain the saga that followed, but I am sure that in answering your questions, I will be able to set out my arguments.

Thank you very much.

September 24th, 2018 / 7:45 p.m.
See context

Criminologist and Sociologist, President of Mouranie-Criminologie, As an Individual

Maria Mourani

Thank you Mr. Chair.

Good evening, everyone.

It's always a great pleasure to be with you. I thank the committee for its invitation. I also want to greet my former colleague Joy Smith, with whom I worked extensively on this issue when I was an MP.

As you can probably imagine, I will not discuss all of the provisions contained in Bill C-75, which is quite long. I will simply address the provisions that concern my bill on human trafficking, which is Bill C-452, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (exploitation and trafficking in persons). The bill was tabled for first reading on October 2012, and passed unanimously at second and third readings, as you know. It then passed all of the stages in the Senate and received Royal Assent on June 18, 2015.

I will focus more specifically on clause 389 of Bill C-75, since that clause establishes the coming into force of clauses 1, 2 and 4 of Bill C-452, and stipulates that clause 3 must be the subject of an order. Its coming into force is thus subject to an order, which is to say that this depends on the government's will to do so; the government clearly expressed its opposition to this clause at the time.

I know that several members around this table are new and were not members of Parliament during the previous Parliament. So I want to provide some explanation about how this bill came into being.

The bill was the result of a consultation that lasted several years. Many groups were consulted, including women's groups, victims' aid groups, victims themselves, and police officers—several police forces were consulted. The bill was also reviewed by criminal law jurists in Quebec. And so it was studied and studied again, and developed into the bill you see now.

A criminological analysis was also done of the phenomenon of trafficking in persons in Canada, which led us to understand that there were gaps in our Criminal Code that need to be filled in. Our observations led us to the following conclusions: first, trafficking in persons is very, very lucrative. People who pursue this criminal activity make a lot of money. The phenomenon is not unique to Canada; it is global. In fact, several experts believe that the proceeds from this criminal activity are second only to drug trafficking, and that it is even more lucrative than arms dealing. It's appalling!

Not only is human trafficking lucrative, it causes incredible suffering for the victims. I can tell you that in the course of my professional work, since the end of the 90s, I have met many, many victims. What they have to say, the suffering of these victims, is unimaginable, and defies description. It can sometimes even make you wonder if it is real. You react by thinking that this can't be, how can such things happen here, in Canada?

The most common form of trafficking in persons in Canada is internal trafficking. So this directly involves our girls, girls who are moved all over Canada to be subjected to the the most prevalent form of trafficking in the country: sexual exploitation. This is what I will focus on. There is also, of course, some trafficking involving forced labour. To my knowledge, organ trafficking is not happening in Canada, but it's possible that it is. It may simply be that we haven't caught the perpetrators yet; I don't know.

Trafficking in persons for the purpose of sexual exploitation is not only the most prevalent form of trafficking, but it generates billions of dollars for the sex industry. For instance, it has been determined that 11% of men in Canada have purchased the services of prostitutes. Comparison can be comforting, as the saying goes: in the Netherlands, that figure is 60%. In Germany it is 66%, and in Cambodia, 65%. In Sweden, where the approach is completely different, it drops to 8.5%. Don't forget that when prostitution is legalized, trafficking increases, as does consumption.

Human trafficking in Canada and internationally mostly involves women and children. The average age of entry into prostitution in Canada is about 14. I have met victims who became prostitutes at 13. Others were forced into prostitution at 10 or 11. The average however is 14, 15, and 16. And yet we aren't in Thailand, we are in Canada.

For a five-year period, from 2007 to 2013, 40% of victims identified as such in Canada were minors. This confirms the global trend, where an increase in the statistics involving minors has been noted. The victims are of course mostly girls rather than boys.

The cities that are reputed to be trafficking hubs are Montreal, Calgary, Vancouver and Toronto. Canada is recognized as a transit country, a country where recruitment takes place, and a sex tourism destination. These observations were made by the RCMP and the American State Department. What is very compelling is that on average, a perpetrator who exploits a victim sexually can make between $168,000 to $336,000 per year from one victim. These are RCMP figures, once again. As I said, trafficking is very lucrative.

Bill C-452 had two objectives: to make trafficking less lucrative, or not lucrative at all, and to protect the victims. Our consultation made us realize that trafficking is a crime that needs a victim; we need the testimony of a victim. However, as you know, the victims are either terrorized or in love with and under the spell of their pimps. They suffer from PTSD, Stockholm syndrome and all sorts of psychological ailments. But without victims, it is extremely difficult to conduct investigations.

We also saw that when we managed to get investigations done that led to convictions, the penalties did not fit the crimes. The victims said that quite often the traffickers were charged with three or four offences and were sentenced to the full extent of the law, as that is the system we had. The victims did not understand. A pimp was charged with trafficking, pimping, aggravated assault, attempted murder, and in the end, the offender was sentenced for the most serious offence, but this was a light sentence as compared to the gravity of all of the crimes committed. Consequently the victims felt that they were subjected to another injustice at the hands of the system. They wound up feeling that there was no point denouncing the trafficker and having to go through all of that judicial process.

So basically, we had to find a way to remedy all of this. I felt—and this was supported by my various partners—that if we could make trafficking less lucrative it would be less attractive, and involve a lot of risks for the traffickers. This would create a balance. First, we had to do something that still does not exist in our system, and that is an aberration, and that is to confiscate the proceeds of criminality. This is done in the case of big drug traffickers, but not for human trafficking. So we added that.

Someone who gets caught and is convicted must demonstrate that all of his assets are not derived from trafficking and the sexual exploitation of girls. On the one hand, the state may take away everything he owns. In addition, given the reversal of the burden of proof, investigations can be held without the need for the testimony of a victim. This is due to the victim protection process. They are not obliged to testify; the police officers are the ones who must gather the necessary evidence to charge a trafficker.

September 19th, 2018 / 4:05 p.m.
See context

L & LR Coordinator, Canadian Bar Association

Tony Paisana

We made submissions in 2014, regarding the first incarnation of this, which was Bill C-452. You will see that some parts of that brief are reproduced in our brief here. The rebuttable presumption is vulnerable under paragraph 11(d) and section 7 of the charter, as a violation of the right to be presumed innocent.

We do not think it will be saved under section 1, because there does not exist enough evidence to show that the section 1 test will be fulfilled. If you are habitually in the company of someone who is exploited, it does not necessarily follow that you are responsible for the exploitation. In fact, you may imperil various people who are in the company of people who are exploited but who are not themselves exploited but who happen to be in the area.

We provided an example in our original brief about a worker who was being paid but whose co-worker is not being paid and is being exploited. That person could be at risk of a human trafficking conviction because of this rebuttable presumption.

September 18th, 2018 / 4:40 p.m.
See context

Kara Gillies Canadian Alliance for Sex Work Law Reform

Thank you so much.

Good afternoon and thank you for the opportunity to address you today.

The Canadian Alliance for Sex Work Law Reform is a coalition of 28 sex worker and allied organizations from across the country advocating for law reform that advances the rights and safety of people who sell or trade sex. Our member groups have expertise regarding the impact of criminal law on the lives and well-being of sex workers, so it's on those grounds that we submit our response to Bill C-75.

I'm going to be really frank and say that we are very disappointed and frustrated that the Criminal Code provisions targeting sex workers and their personal and work relations are not slated for repeal or meaningfully addressed in Bill C-75. The Liberal and NDP parties of Canada voiced staunch opposition to the Protection of Communities and Exploited Persons Act, or PCEPA, when it was introduced. In 2015, the justice minister declared that she was “definitely...committed to reviewing the prostitution laws”, yet this review has stalled.

This isn't just a matter of principle or a matter of promises unkept. Each day that passes, sex workers' rights, safety and dignity are violated through the individual and collective impact of laws prohibiting the communication for, purchase of, material benefit from, procuring of and advertising of commercial sexual services. We are past the time for review, and we need action.

We believe that excluding the repeal of PCEPA from Bill C-75 was a gross missed opportunity, given the overall alignment of many the bill's principles and elements with those of sex work law reform.

First, Bill C-75 rightly repeals several Criminal Code provisions ruled unconstitutional by Canadian courts. In 2013, the Supreme Court found in Bedford that several criminal prostitution laws caused harms that violated sex workers' charter right to security of the person. The subsequent Criminal Code provisions enacted by PCEPA replicate these harms, and their constitutionality is similarly impugned.

Second, Bill C-75 rightly repeals the offences of anal intercourse and abortion that targeted sexual or reproductive activities and autonomy and that disproportionately impacted LGBTQ2S communities and women respectively. Prohibitions on sex work activities similarly undermine the rights to liberty, autonomy and security of the person and disproportionately impact women, indigenous and migrant communities, and other marginalized groups.

Third, Bill C-75 correctly proposes to attend to the discriminatory treatment and overrepresentation of indigenous and marginalized peoples in the criminal justice system. Sex workers and/or personal and labour relations reflect the diversity and inequality of social locations in Canadian society. For many, sex work prohibitions represent the criminalization of their poverty and perpetuate the over-policing and over-incarceration of indigenous and black peoples.

Sex work laws continue to be employed and enforced in a racist and colonial manner. Indigenous women are over-policed and under-protected. Asian migrant workers are targeted for investigation and deportation, and young black men who happen to be boyfriends or associates of sex work workers are labelled and prosecuted as pimps.

We recognize that most of the PCEPA laws have been absented from Bill C-75 and thus cannot be repealed or otherwise altered through committee amendments. We note, however, that clause 111 reclassifies the material benefit offence as a hybrid offence and that clause 112 amends the sentencing provisions of the advertising offence. Because these two offences are addressed within the bill, if it's a procedural possibility, we strongly urge amending the bill to repeal these Criminal Code provisions in their entirety. By criminalizing the act of materially benefiting from another party's sex work, section 286.2 restricts sex workers' capacity to engage in supportive work relationships that enhance our safety and improve our work conditions. In fact, this provision reproduces the harms of the prior “living on the avails” offence that was struck down by Bedford for violating our section 7 charter rights.

Any proposition that the listed exceptions to the offence satisfy Bedford are false. All but one simply codifies jurisprudence that predates the Supreme Court's decision. Then there are exceptions to the exceptions, which further repress sex workers' autonomy and security. For example, paragraph 286.2(5)(e) prohibits a liability exception in the context of a commercial enterprise. This captures all escort agencies, massage parlours and any other sex work business that creates safe, structured indoor work environments.

While we appreciate that the exceptions may allow a worker to hire, say, a bodyguard or a receptionist, we are mindful that only a tiny number of highly privileged workers have the resources to do so. Instead, many of us seek out parlours and escort agencies because they offer services such as screening, secure venues and advertising without the upfront costs and overhead of independent work.

It is often the most marginalized and under-resourced workers, such as indigenous, poor, or migrant workers, who benefit from working for someone else. However, these same laws that prevent sex workers from ensuring our safety and rights are upheld, because we work for businesses, do so, ironically, because they effectively preclude us from accessing basic labour, occupational health and safety, or human rights protection. To make it worse, material benefits arising from the context of a commercial enterprise is considered an aggregating factor upon sentencing.

As with the former “living on the avails” provision, the material benefit sanction imposes an evidentiary presumption on anyone who lives with or is in the habitual company of a sex worker. In addition to reinforcing the false assumption that people, particularly women, who sell or trade sex can't be legitimate objects of affection, the threat of presumed criminality disrupts the security and autonomy of our personal relationships.

I will make a final comment on the material benefits offence. Although when we discuss it we typically describe it as benefiting from another party's sex work, the provision itself does not specify a third party benefit. Under the letter of the law, sex workers are ourselves captured in the material benefits provision. We are only granted immunity from prosecution via section 286.5. This is a clear illustration that PCEPA does indeed continue to construct those of us who sell or trade sex as criminal.

We therefore recommend that clause 111 of Bill C-75 be amended to call for the repeal of the material benefits provision, as a first step towards a more comprehensive sex work law reform.

Next I'm going to turn to Criminal Code section 286.4, which prohibits advertising paid sexual services. As with the prohibitions on communicating and purchasing, this provision undermines the safety benefits that sex workers derive from openly communicating terms and conditions with their clients, and establishing boundaries in advance of in-person contact.

Prohibiting advertising creates significant barriers to working indoors, which the evidentiary record in Bedford demonstrates is much safer than working on the street. Since the enactment of the advertising provision, many websites and newspapers will no longer publicize sex worker services. Those that do have often discontinued their virtual lounges that allowed workers to share safety and other valuable information with each other.

With these points in mind, we recommend that clause 112 of the bill be amended to call for the repeal of the Criminal Code section 286.4.

Continuing with the Criminal Code provisions addressed in the bill, we want to reiterate our opposition to Bill C-38 and Bill C-452, which is now incorporated into clause 389 of Bill C-75.

Bill C-452 introduced an evidentiary presumption that living with or being in the habitual company of an alleged trafficking victim is proof that the accused exercised control, direction or influence over the alleged victim's movements for the purposes of exploitation. Given the ongoing conflation of third party involvement with sex work and trafficking, we are concerned that, as with the reverse onus provision for material benefit, this presumption will further alienate sex workers from police and social services, as we continue to actively avoid implicating our colleagues and loved ones as traffickers.

We do support the bill's removal of consecutive mandatory minimum sentences for trafficking offences. However, like others who have responded to Bill C-75, we are perplexed as to why mandatory minimums have not been repealed across the board.

Other Criminal Code offences that are insufficiently addressed in the bill are the bawdy house, indecent acts and vagrancy sections. These have traditionally been used to condemn individuals and communities based on their sexual activities, relationships and identities, including people who sell or trade sex. The Prime Minister's 2017 apology to LGBTQ2S people should be buttressed by the repeal of these sanctions.

The alliance doesn't have a current position on the bill's Criminal Code amendments regarding intimate partner violence. However, we will note that intimate partner violence impacts our communities, not simply because sex-working women, like other women, experience intimate partner violence, but also because such instances of violence are often mislabelled and prosecuted as materially benefiting, procuring and trafficking. If criminal sanctions related to intimate partner violence were used instead of third party sex worker trafficking laws, where appropriate, we might be able to express support. However, we're concerned that they would be used as add-ons.

Additionally, we have potential concerns about increased sentences and reverse onus bail provisions, because we know only too well the effect of heightened criminalization and its disproportionate impact on the most marginalized among us. However, we have no specific recommendations on these points.

Finally, on a general note, we are concerned that elements of Bill C-75 will impede access to justice and fair treatment for people in and associated with the sex trade who come in conflict with the law for any reason, and who are further marginalized by their social or structural locations.

Increasing the maximum sentence for summary convictions risks the continued over-incarceration of marginalized peoples, both through the increased maximum sentence itself and by restricting access to agent representations.

Permitting the written admission of routine police evidence risks undermining trial fairness by complicating defence access to cross-examinations that can expose cases of police error, impropriety or actual abuse, and which are especially vital to protect the rights of indigenous and black defendants.

Those are our thoughts and concerns. Thank you for taking the time to hear them.

September 17th, 2018 / 3:55 p.m.
See context

Matthew Taylor Acting Senior Counsel, Criminal Law Policy Section, Policy Sector, Department of Justice

I'll take that question. Thank you.

As the charter statement outlines, the combination of the mandatory consecutive sentencing that exists for human trafficking offences and the requirement of the former private member's bill, Bill C-452, to impose mandatory consecutive sentencing is where the charter concern arises. It's the result of the stacking of consecutive sentences, which are also mandatory sentences, that raises the charter concerns.

I think I answered your question, but you mentioned something about presumption as well.

September 17th, 2018 / 3:50 p.m.
See context

NDP

Murray Rankin NDP Victoria, BC

No, that's fine. Thank you. I appreciate that it's not easy to answer questions quickly.

I'd like to ask you about clause 389 of this bill, which deals with human trafficking. Bill C-75 puts in force provisions of Maria Mourani's private member's bill, Bill C-452, which got royal assent in June 2015 but was never put into force by order of the federal government. Some of that bill is back before us today.

In your opinion, does the combination of consecutive sentences, with the presumption of exploitation, violate any charter rights?

May 29th, 2018 / 4:10 p.m.
See context

Québec debout

Rhéal Fortin Québec debout Rivière-du-Nord, QC

As far as I'm concerned, there is no problem.

According to what I understood, the government detected a potential problem following advice received from the Canadian Bar Association. The Barreau du Québec had provided positive advice according to which all of Bill C-452 could be brought into effect. For its part, the Canadian Bar Association said that there was no problem except for clause 3 regarding consecutive sentences. It said that this clause could run counter to the Charter and be considered as... I don't remember the term but it doesn't matter. The Canadian Bar Association thought there could be a problem with the Charter.

That is the pretext or the reason invoked by the government to justify its decision to withdraw clause 3 to be able to study it in committee and bring it in later after making sure that it was properly worded. As for clauses 1, 2 and 4, it said that they could come into effect immediately. That is what the government said in February 2017.

All I am saying is that if we agree that clauses 1, 2 and 4 do not pose a problem, I don't understand why they have not been brought into effect. At a minimum, this would reverse the burden of proof, the presumption. This seems important to fight against pimping and the prostitution of young girls.

My colleagues know this as well as I do, and people spoke to us about this in the House on many occasions; there were press conferences and all of that. We agree that this is urgent. In 2011, we were saying this was urgent. We are now in 2018. We recognize that this is urgent since we keep adopting bills that say the same thing. Let's stop saying the same thing and bring the law into effect.

I don't claim to be an expert on constitutional law, but I don't think there is any problem regarding the consecutive sentences. If the government thinks there is one, let's work on that, but let's do it now because this is urgent.

Every day we wait counts. Last year, some 900 young girls had prostitution-related issues. We all have young girls in our families, whether they are our daughters, granddaughters or nieces. Would we like to see them caught up in this type of situation? We mustn't think that we are immune. We are not. That is why it is urgent that we act.

May 29th, 2018 / 4:05 p.m.
See context

NDP

Murray Rankin NDP Victoria, BC

Thank you to all the witnesses.

My question is for Mr. Fortin.

I agree with what you said about member of Parliament Maria Mourani's bill C-452. It is indecent and embarrassing that we are still postponing its enactment. I agree entirely with you on that.

The bill includes two aspects. First, there are the consecutive sentences. It has been said that they might not be constitutional under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Also, the burden of proof is reversed in the case of pimps who are charged with exploitation and human trafficking. Does that also raise constitutional issues?

May 29th, 2018 / 3:50 p.m.
See context

Québec debout

Rhéal Fortin Québec debout Rivière-du-Nord, QC

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak here today.

As you can imagine, this issue — which we have often addressed in the House — concerns us very much in Quebec. The issues seem quite well defined. The solutions also seem quite well defined, but for reasons I do not understand, the government does not seem to want to move forward, which concerns us greatly. I will explain what I mean.

In Quebec, the problem of prostitution is especially concerning for young girls of 18 years of age or less. Our Montreal youth centres have become recruitment points for prostitution. There have in fact been numerous interventions over the past few years. As a member of Parliament, and as a lawyer in my previous life, I had the opportunity of meeting with many of the workers who work with these organizations, who say that they are concerned, and have been for years.

Before the 2011 election, Bloc Québécois MP Maria Mourani presented Bill C-612 on this topic, but the bill died on the Order Paper following the 2011 elections. It was presented again in 2013. In 2015, Ms. Mourani's Bill C-452 was adopted unanimously by the House of Commons. It was then passed by the Senate and received royal assent on June 18, 2015.

What did this bill say? First, it created a presumption that an individual living in the same apartment as a person practising prostitution is reputed to be living from the avails of prostitution, and reputed to be a pimp. This reversed the burden of proof, which meant that these young girls, often very young, as my Senate colleagues have said — young girls who were sometimes 12, 13, 15 or 16 — could avoid having to testify about the guilt of a pimp, who scared them and controlled them. This made it very hard for them to give this kind of evidence. And so the burden of proof was reversed.

The bill also made it possible to seize goods acquired from the avails of prostitution. There was an issue of consistency, and also the matter of consecutive sentences, which seemed to us to be an important deterrent in the fight against prostitution.

Bill C-452, which dealt with these important issues, received royal assent in June 2015. Everyone had hoped that during the summer, it would be enacted, and we could finally tell young girls that we would provide some effective protection. Unfortunately an election was called at the end of the summer, and when the new government took power in October 2015, Bill C-452 was shelved and forgotten about for a time.

Subsequenty, as you know, considerable pressure was applied by my party and its members, and by civil society, and finally the current government decided to introduce another bill, C-38, on February 9, 2017. Bill C-38's only objective was to bring Bill C-452 into effect. It did nothing else. It indicated that we were in agreement with Bill C-452 and that its clauses 1, 2 and 4 would be adopted immediately; as for clause 3 regarding consecutive sentences, that was not certain. People felt that this clause would not survive a constitutional challenge. So the coming into force of consecutive sentences was postponed to a later date.

In February 2017, everyone hoped that the bill would be tabled and that it would be passed quickly. Unfortunately, today, in May 2018, a year and several months later, nothing has yet been done, and moreover, another way of doing nothing is to simply push things forward. And so Bill C-75 was introduced, a mammoth bill, as you know. Bill C-38was included in it, and it will be dealt with at some point.

Since 2011, we have not dealt with this seriously. I am embarrassed to say that I am sitting in a Parliament that is not taking this issue more seriously. We keep postponing it. There were bills C-612, C-452, C-38 and C-75.

Are we in agreement or aren't we? We adopted a bill unanimously, it received royal assent, and then we let things go. Personally, I think it is indecent and embarrassing that these young girls who are counting on us are still having to deal with pimps. People don't just depend on us to extend apologies and say that what happened to them 100, 50 or 200 years ago was very sad. They are counting on us to help eliminate daily, current problems they are facing.

Sometimes there is no solution. It happens. In certain cases, solutions are complicated and take time. However, we are talking here about a problem to which there is a solution we agreed on and had adopted.

Can this order be issued?

That is what I had to say today, Mr. Chair. I'll stop here. I think my message is clear.

May 10th, 2018 / 4:20 p.m.
See context

Director, Victim Services, La Maison de Mélanie

Mélanie Carpentier

The important thing is to follow through. Sex work has increased dramatically, but we can't get concrete statistics because it used to happen in public places, whereas now it's more underground. Girls are posting ads on Backpage or other dating sites. It's even harder to get figures. We will never get statistics on the number of victims of human trafficking in Canada.

By criminalizing human trafficking, creating a legal framework around sex work, and applying the measures set out in Bill C-452, you would be showing that this is not acceptable. If people feel comfortable in the sex work industry and want to work in that field, they would have the right to keep doing so, because it's legal, but we need to protect victims. As for transactions between two consenting people, it's not up to me to say that's not okay.

May 10th, 2018 / 3:50 p.m.
See context

Mélanie Carpentier Director, Victim Services, La Maison de Mélanie

Hello Mr. Chair and committee members.

Thank you for having me here today. I do speak English, but it will be easier if I speak French.

As I listened to what you have been saying, it seems clear to me that sexual exploitation and human trafficking are not really part of your reality. That is why I want to come back to the victims and talk about who they are. The victims are your friends, your sisters, your daughters. They are girls who thought that, one day, their prince charming would come along and save them. They watched Sleeping Beauty, where a prince awakens a girl from a deep sleep. They watched Snow White, who is saved by a street gang of seven dwarves and then prince charming comes along and offers her the life of her dreams. They watched Beauty and the Beast in which Belle transforms the beast into her prince charming with her love, a perfect example of Stockholm syndrome.

Slowly and silently, they become desensitized to sexuality and all of a sudden their prince turns into a frog. This happens so surreptitiously that they do not see anything coming and then they feel responsible for what is happening to them. Others go to a party, unknowingly take a date rape drug, and are gang raped. Their lives are forever changed in an instant.

Who are the victims?

I am the founder and director of La Maison de Mélanie. I work with victims of sexual exploitation and human trafficking for the purpose of sexual exploitation. The victims are police officers, teachers, or MPs who were captured one day. Sexual exploitation has extremely serious consequences, but today I have the opportunity to speak to you on behalf of myself, as a survivor, and on behalf of all those that I fondly refer to as my little sisters in combat, those who have survived the horror of this heinous crime.

In 2014, it became an offence to purchase sexual services of any kind under the Criminal Code of Canada. The women and girls in the industry are supposed to be considered victims, but that is not at all reflected in the society in which we live or in the way such matters are handled by the courts. The stigmatization, exclusion, marginalization, judgment, and rejection that we, as victims, have to live with day in and day out are completely unacceptable and unbearable.

In addition to surviving the most horrific atrocities, we have to deal with constant revictimization, which prevents us from creating a new identity and growing as individuals. By failing to enforce Bill C-452 to give us justice and by making us responsible for what we experienced, the government is giving power to our exploiters and clients and is violating our rights under the Canadian Victims Bill of Rights.

We have the right to be recognized for who we are—victims—and to be heard and believed. Our rights, including our right to redress from the courts, are violated because very few people are receptive to the horror that we experienced. They believe that we are responsible for our own dehumanization, which is a modern form of slavery. We also have the right to obtain justice and to be protected. Since that would involve imposing exemplary sentences on our exploiters and applying consecutive sentences, it is clear that, in your eyes and the eyes of society, we are worth less than those who exploit us.

Today, I hold a bachelor's degree from the Université de Montréal, and I am just about to finish a second bachelor's degree so that I can become a member of the Ordre professionnel des criminologues du Québec. I was awarded a medal of honour by the Senate for my involvement in Canadian society, for my contribution, and for my work with victims.

If the current act were amended and a place were made for victims, how many others could become contributing members of this great country of Canada.

Human trafficking does not just affect victims and their families. It also affects society as a whole. If we fail to provide adequate services for victims of sexual exploitation, we are responsible for higher hospital fees, suicides, children being placed, abandonment, abuse, and addiction. However, if victims were given what they need now, we could help them grow.

I would like to make a comparison with veterans. A total of 42% of members of the Canadian Armed Forces experience symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder, whereas 94% of women who are raped experience such symptoms. Victims of sexual exploitation are raped every day. They are constantly being raped by one or more people. What percentage of them will experience symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder?

La Maison de Mélanie and I would like to respectfully make some recommendations.

First, sex education needs to begin in elementary school, particularly when it comes to the notion of consent.

Second, we need to ensure that professionals who may be called upon to help victims are given the proper training so that they can recognize victims and intervene appropriately. I am talking about people such as police officers, social workers, teachers, and others who work in schools, in sports, and in community organizations.

Third, judges need training so that they are aware of the impact human trafficking has on victims.

Fourth, there is a need for more services for victims of sexual exploitation, for example, housing services that meet their needs.

Fifth, we recommend the enforcement of former Bill C-452, which seeks to remove the burden of proof from victims of human trafficking and place it on exploiters, as well as to provide consecutive sentences for offences related to human trafficking.

Sixth, the Canadian Victims Bill of Rights needs to be enforced, particularly the right to protection before, during, and after court proceedings.

Seventh, we recommend making legal help available to the victims of human trafficking for the purposes of sexual exploitation.

Thank you.

JusticeOral Questions

March 29th, 2018 / noon
See context

Québec debout

Rhéal Fortin Québec debout Rivière-du-Nord, QC

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, we attempted to better protect young girls in Canada by fast-tracking the passage of Bill C-38, a government bill to combat pimping.

We would have preferred Bill C-452, but the Prime Minister went back on his vote. In collusion with the Conservatives, the Liberals said no to our motion. They said no to making life hard for pimps. The Liberals and the Conservatives would rather preserve the status quo than protect our young girls.

How can the government justify refusing to pass its own bill?

JusticeOral Questions

March 29th, 2018 / 11:20 a.m.
See context

Conservative

Alain Rayes Conservative Richmond—Arthabaska, QC

Mr. Speaker, here are the facts: thousands of young girls across Canada, including about 2,000 in Quebec alone, are trapped in the clutches of pimps and street gangs.

Since 2013, MPs and senators have been doing their job and unanimously supported Bill C-452. This includes the Prime Minister, I might add, when he was in opposition.

When it comes to legalizing marijuana, the Prime Minister has no problem rushing it through, but when it comes to protecting our young girls who are trapped in the clutches of pimps, he seems to find it too difficult to sign the document.

What is he waiting for?

JusticeOral Questions

March 29th, 2018 / 11:15 a.m.
See context

Conservative

Alain Rayes Conservative Richmond—Arthabaska, QC

Mr. Speaker, three years ago, all MPs and all senators voted unanimously in favour of Bill C-452 to combat procuring and trafficking in persons. The only thing missing for this legislation to take effect is the Prime Minister's signature. Members heard correctly: the Prime Minister's signature is the only thing missing to give our justice and public safety systems the tools needed to protect our young girls who are trapped in the hell of prostitution and human trafficking.

My question is simple. When will the Prime Minister finally sign the legislation?

Status of WomenOral Questions

March 28th, 2018 / 3:10 p.m.
See context

Québec debout

Rhéal Fortin Québec debout Rivière-du-Nord, QC

Mr. Speaker, Bill C-452 was passed unanimously and received royal assent in June 2015. This bill included consecutive sentences and reversed the burden of proof. It was a strong and tangible gesture to take action against pimps. However, the Liberals backtracked and introduced Bill C-38, a truncated version of Bill C-452, which itself has been gathering dust since February 2017. It has yet to be debated.

Did the Prime Minister really want to take action against sexual exploitation or was this just another show?

JusticeOral Questions

March 28th, 2018 / 2:35 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Alain Rayes Conservative Richmond—Arthabaska, QC

Mr. Speaker, in 2015, all senators and all MPs voted in favour of Bill C-452 to combat procuring and trafficking in persons. Even the Prime Minister and all Liberal members voted in favour of the bill.

The only thing missing now is the Prime Minister's signature. Everything in life is all about priorities. Because of the Prime Minister's inaction, thousands of young girls and their families have continued living in hell for three years now.

When will the Prime Minister finally sign the bill?

Human Trafficking and Child ProstitutionStatements By Members

March 27th, 2018 / 2 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Sylvie Boucher Conservative Beauport—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île d’Orléans—Charlevoix, QC

Mr. Speaker, human trafficking and child prostitution has been a growing problem in Canada in recent years. Innocent young girls are falling victim to pimps who destroy their lives. In order to address this serious problem, all parties unanimously passed the former Conservative government's Bill C-452, but the current government is refusing to sign the order in council for the coming into force of this bill. Instead, the Liberals introduced their own revised and watered down version of the bill, Bill C-38. Since then, there has been a growing number of victims, making this government complicit in this unacceptable plague on society.

Like all Canadians, I am outraged by the rise in the phenomenon of pimping in Canada and even more so by the fact that this so-called feminist government has stood idly by and allowed criminals to continue to destroy the lives of the young women it claims to want to protect and help reach their full potential. The government has a responsibility to take immediate action to help victims. It is a matter—

February 15th, 2018 / 4 p.m.
See context

Acting Senior Counsel, Criminal Law Policy Section, Policy Sector, Department of Justice

Matthew Taylor

You're correct that the amendments that were passed through Bill C-452 by Parliament are not yet in force. Bill C-38, which was introduced by the government, is in the House of Commons currently. It proposes to amend the coming into force clause of Bill C-452 for the reasons you have outlined with respect to the mandatory consecutive sentencing. It's no surprise that it's complicated to follow because it also relates to another piece of legislation that was passed by Parliament, Bill C-36, which I spoke about, and that was the bill that enacted mandatory minimum penalties for trafficking.

February 15th, 2018 / 4 p.m.
See context

NDP

Murray Rankin NDP Victoria, BC

Thank you, Chair.

Thanks to all the witnesses for getting us started on this fascinating area.

I want to build on what Mr. Fraser asked Mr. Taylor about initially. I'm trying to get my head around the Criminal Code. Forgive me, but I tried, first of all, to understand where we are with Bill C-38, which you mentioned. To my understanding, the original bill, Bill C-452, was introduced by Maria Mourani to amend the code to provide for consecutive sentences for offences related to procurement and trafficking in persons, and it created what you talked about in another context, a presumption regarding the exploitation of one person by another, and added circumstances that were deemed to constitute exploitation.

Then Bill C-38, which amended that bill, passed with unanimous support almost a year ago, if I'm not mistaken, and it would implement every part of the original bill but the section that implemented the consecutive sentencing part, because the Liberals were reviewing, and still are reviewing, the issue of mandatory minimum sentences.

I just want to know if I have that right. Is that essentially correct? It's not in force yet—or is it in force?

February 15th, 2018 / 3:20 p.m.
See context

Acting Senior Counsel, Criminal Law Policy Section, Policy Sector, Department of Justice

Matthew Taylor

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I thought it might be helpful to the committee for me to provide information for you on two separate things: first, the legislative history of Canada's criminal laws on human trafficking, and second, some background information on the types of programs that Justice Canada has funded to enhance services for victims of human trafficking.

Canada's first human trafficking specific offence was enacted in 2002 as part of the enactment of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act. Section 118 prohibits the trafficking of persons into Canada and targets the means used by traffickers, such as force, fraud, abduction, deception, or coercion to bring victims into our country. It should be noted that the enactment of this offence coincided with Canada's implementation of the UN protocol to prevent, suppress and punish trafficking in persons, especially women and children, which Canada ratified in May of 2002.

In 2005, Parliament passed Bill C-49, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (trafficking in persons), and enacted three specific Criminal Code offences to more comprehensively address human trafficking, specifically, section 279.01 which prohibits all forms of human trafficking, domestic or transnational, and for any exploitative purpose; section 279.02, which prohibits the receipt of a financial or a material benefit knowing that it was derived from human trafficking; and, third, section 279.03, which prohibits the holding of identity documents to facilitate human trafficking.

Since that time, additional criminal law reforms have been passed by Parliament. In 2010, a private member's bill, Bill C-268, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (minimum sentence for offences involving trafficking of persons under the age of eighteen years), was enacted, creating a separate offence of trafficking in children that is punishable by mandatory minimum penalties of imprisonment.

In 2012, two years later, a private member's bill, Bill C-310, was enacted, enabling Canada to assume extraterritorial jurisdiction to prosecute in Canada Canadian citizens or permanent residents who commit human trafficking abroad. It also enacted a provision in subsection 279.04(2) that provides guidance to the courts in helping them to determine whether exploitation has been made out, exploitation being an essential element of the trafficking in persons offence.

In 2014, former Bill C-36 was passed, enacting the Protection of Communities and Exploited Persons Act.This act provided new mandatory minimum penalties for human trafficking involving adult victims and for the financial benefit and documents offences involving child victims.

Most recently, the government has introduced Bill C-38, an act to amend An Act to amend the Criminal Code (exploitation and trafficking in persons), to bring in force certain amendments that were passed in Parliament in 2015 through a private member's bill, Bill C-452, and also An Act to amend the Criminal Code (exploitation and trafficking in persons). These provisions would enact an evidentiary presumption to help prosecutors prove an element of the human trafficking offence.

That's a bit of a summary of the changes that have been enacted by Parliament. As you can see, these criminal laws in respect of human trafficking have been the subject of ongoing interest and concern by parliamentarians.

At the same time, Justice Canada has supported their implementation in various ways, including through the provision of regular training to police and prosecutors, in conjunction with the RCMP and other police forces, victim services, and other experts. We've developed a handbook for police and prosecutors and fact sheets on key criminal justice issues for police and prosecutors, such as sentencing submissions, bail proceedings, and things of that nature in a human trafficking context. Justice officials have participated in similar efforts internationally, working closely with the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime to develop similar technical assistance tools to support implementation around the world.

The department is also supporting improvements to victim services. A copy of initiatives that have been funded since 2012 by the department through the victims fund has been provided to the clerk of the committee, I believe, detailing the specifics of each project. Examples for your information include: enhancing victim services delivery in British Columbia, Alberta, Ontario, and Quebec; supporting the development of a resource handbook for indigenous women and girls who were victimized through human trafficking for the purposes of sexual exploitation; and, developing a mental health and addictions program for women and girls who were victims of trafficking.

I'm going to conclude my remarks there. I look forward to any questions.

Status of WomenOral Questions

February 14th, 2018 / 3 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Pierre Paul-Hus Conservative Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC

Mr. Speaker, Bill C-452, introduced by a female member of Parliament to help women who are victims of human trafficking, was shelved by a Prime Minister who claims to be a feminist.

Instead of accepting the decisions made by the House and the Senate, he came back with his own bill, which favours the offenders over the women.

Why will he not acknowledge that his bill is sloppy, and when will he help and protect these vulnerable women?

JusticeAdjournment Proceedings

December 11th, 2017 / 7:10 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Arnold Viersen Conservative Peace River—Westlock, AB

Mr. Speaker, earlier this month I highlighted the fact that every year, hundreds of young Canadian women, girls, and boys are lured into the vicious cycle of sex trafficking. I asked when the Liberal government would start fighting this horrific form of modern-day slavery.

This is not the first time I have raised the issue of sex trafficking and this government's lack of action on it. In fact, exactly one year ago, I stood here to raise the same issue during adjournment, and in the past 12 months this government has done nothing. In fact, since coming to power, the Liberals have allowed the fight against human trafficking to languish. They have allowed the national action plan to combat human trafficking to expire. They ended funding for NGOs. They have blocked important tools for police that were adopted by this House over four years ago, and then the Liberals introduced legislation, Bill C-38, to lighten sentences for sex traffickers.

A week ago the parliamentary secretary to the minister of public safety, in his response to my question during question period, claimed that the government's Bill C-38 would give police and prosecutors new tools to investigate human trafficking.

I would never suggest that the member was misleading the House, but I would rather give him the benefit of the doubt that he may not have read Bill C-38 in answering the question. If he had read it, he would know that Bill C-38 is only one paragraph long and does not have any provisions whatsoever giving police or prosecutors new tools to investigate human trafficking. Even the Minister of Justice, when she introduced Bill C-38 last February, wrongly claimed that Bill C-38 included tools for police and prosecutors to combat human trafficking.

However, the tools they pretend to be in Bill C-38 were in fact unanimously adopted by this House four years ago in an NDP private member's bill, Bill C-452, which was supported by a Conservative government and voted on by the current Prime Minister. It was Bill C-452 that created the presumption with respect to the exploitation of one person by another, added the offence of trafficking in persons to the list of offences to which the reverse onus forfeiture of proceeds of crime provisions would apply, corrected a technical discrepancy, and included a provision that human trafficking sentences would be served consecutively.

Bill C-452 received royal assent in June 2015. Then the Liberal government came into power and has since blocked Bill C-452 from coming into force. Why? It is because the Liberals do not like the idea that sex traffickers might face consecutive sentences. They feel it is too harsh to expect that a child trafficker should serve a long sentence for exploiting a minor in sex slavery.

All Bill C-38 does is to prevent sex traffickers from receiving consecutive sentences. That is it. Nothing more. It certainly doesn't help the police.

Eighty percent of the victims of sex trafficking have never come forward because of their fear. All of the investigators of human trafficking who testified on Bill C-452 welcomed the consecutive sentencing and highlighted that long sentences give victims the confidence to come forward to testify. They also pointed out that without consecutive sentencing, a pimp who traffics only one minor will receive the same sentence as a pimp who traffics five or 10 minors. Consecutive sentencing allows for punishments that better reflect the gravity of the situation.

When will this government stop misleading the public about Bill C-38? When will it stop blocking important tools for the police? When will the Liberals stand up for the victims of sex trafficking instead of blocking tougher sentences for those who enslave them?

JusticeOral Questions

February 22nd, 2017 / 3 p.m.
See context

Vancouver Granville B.C.

Liberal

Jody Wilson-Raybould LiberalMinister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the question because it gives me the opportunity to speak to Bill C-38, which we introduced. Our government is committed to combatting human trafficking and better protecting victims of these crimes. We are going to ensure that this bill moves forward as expeditiously as possible. The changes that we made with respect to the previous private member's bill, Bill C-452, were to ensure that our bill is in compliance with the charter.

JusticeOral Questions

February 10th, 2017 / noon
See context

Scarborough Southwest Ontario

Liberal

Bill Blair LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada

Mr. Speaker, our government is very committed to ensuring that we do the right thing to protect victims and to combat human trafficking, the victims of which are among society's most vulnerable.

The bill introduced by the Minister of Justice yesterday would give law enforcement and prosecutors new tools to investigate and prosecute certain human trafficking offences that could be particularly difficult to prove. It would also strengthen Canada's criminal law and respond to trafficking of persons in a manner that would be consistent with the charter.

Bill C-38 would bring into force private member's Bill C-452, with amendments, to better protect victims, while at the same time ensuring consistency with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

JusticeOral Questions

February 9th, 2017 / 2:55 p.m.
See context

Vancouver Granville B.C.

Liberal

Jody Wilson-Raybould LiberalMinister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada

Mr. Speaker, our government is committed to combatting human trafficking and better protecting victims who are among society's most vulnerable.

Bill C-38 would bring into force the former private member's bill, Bill C-452, and also make it in compliance with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The bill would give law enforcement and prosecutors additional tools in terms of investigations and prosecutions to assist in combatting this challenge.

Life Means Life ActPrivate Members' Business

May 19th, 2016 / 5:50 p.m.
See context

NDP

Karine Trudel NDP Jonquière, QC

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to rise here today. It is always a pleasure to represent my constituents, the people of Jonquière. I am always proud to speak in the House of Commons.

Issues that affect my region's economy are especially important to me. We talked about this a lot earlier. Unfortunately, the government is dragging its feet on many files, and this includes protecting jobs in the forestry sector. Our farmers are still fighting against diafiltered milk. We have yet to see any measures to improve access to employment insurance, for example in Saguenay—Lac-Saint-Jean, since we have a two-tier system.

Today in the House we are debating Bill C-229, which amends the Criminal Code and the Corrections and Conditional Release Act.

Let me be very clear: the NDP will be opposing this bill at second reading. It reminds us once again of the many reasons why Canadians sent the previous government packing. This is a bill that seems to have been written on the back of a napkin. It in no way reflects reality.

Instead of spreading misinformation and vote-seeking propaganda, the Conservatives should tell Canadians the truth. Under the current system, the most dangerous offenders who pose a risk to public safety never get out of prison.

We believe in evidence-based policy. Any reforms made to the sentencing regime should focus on improving public safety, not on political games.

The Conservatives have been talking about this bill since 2013, but waited until just a few months before the election was called to announce its introduction at a flashy election-style event. That same day, a Conservative member sent out an email to raise funds and add to the list of Conservative Party members. The subject line of the email was “Murderers in your neighbourhood?” This is another example of the troubling use of the politics of fear by the party that was in power at the time.

The ironic thing about the Conservatives is that they are always the first to want to talk about safety in our communities, but in the last three years, the Conservatives cut RCMP expenditures by millions of dollars. Not so long ago, the commissioner of the RCMP said that they had exhausted their budget and needed more money. That is where investment is needed: in the RCMP and public safety.

I believe that Canadians expect better from politicians. Major issues demand our attention, such as setting a decent minimum wage of $15 an hour and providing better access to employment insurance by making it accessible to everyone in every region.

There is work to do on pay equity and restoring home mail delivery. More resources need to be given to public safety, including the RCMP. Bill C-51 needs to be revisited and the order in council for Bill C-452 on exploitation and trafficking in persons needs to be signed.

Instead, the Conservatives would rather continue to introduce biased bills. Public policy must first and foremost be based on facts, and the objective of such policies must be to keep the public safe, not to win political points. We need to give our public security agencies more resources. We need to take action. We need to invest in prevention in order to prevent crime and help offenders reintegrate into society.

A brilliant lawyer named Michael Spratt said, and I quote:

Throwing away the key is an admission of failure. It amounts to admitting that our prisons are warehouses, that rehabilitation is a lie, that the law that holds us together as a society is still the law of the jungle — an eye for an eye. It’s the politics of despair.

I cannot give a speech about crime without thinking of the victims. Today, my thoughts are with all the victims, particularly the victims of crime. Some of them may be watching right now. Too often we forget the impact of crime on their lives and on the lives of their families, particularly when someone is killed. The NDP has always cared about victims and that is why we think it is so important to implement truly effective policies to keep the public safe.

The Conservatives should do a bit more research before introducing bills. In the current system, the most dangerous criminals who pose a threat to public safety never get out of prison. That is why any reforms made to the sentencing regime should focus on improving public safety and increasing financial resources, rather than on unconstitutional bills.

My opposition colleagues should know that it is up to the Attorney General to ensure that the laws that are introduced by the government are constitutional. However, once again, the Conservatives are introducing a bill that will more than likely end up being challenged in the courts. Many of their bills, some of which were mentioned today in the House, have already been deemed unconstitutional by the court.

I wonder whether my Conservative colleagues respect the principle of constitutionality and the separation of powers. We live in a democracy, but I all too often have the impression that they do not really believe it.

I will come right out with the question and it is up to them to answer it. Do they believe that it is important for parliamentarians to introduce bills that are constitutional? I will give them a chance to answer this question, which I believe is a very simple but important one.

In my view, it is essential that we put forward public policies that are based on facts and comply with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and our Constitution.

JusticeOral Questions

April 13th, 2016 / 3:10 p.m.
See context

Vancouver Granville B.C.

Liberal

Jody Wilson-Raybould LiberalMinister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada

Mr. Speaker, without question, our government takes human trafficking and the exploitation of women and girls incredibly seriously. We are committed to strengthening the efforts to combat this problem.

With respect to Bill C-452, I have had discussions and there are concerns with respect to that particular piece of legislation in terms of the charter. We are working with our colleagues in the province of Quebec to ensure that we continue to address this issue in a substantive way. This is a very serious issue that we are dealing with.

JusticeOral Questions

April 13th, 2016 / 3:10 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Alain Rayes Conservative Richmond—Arthabaska, QC

Mr. Speaker, when it is time to spend money or take part in fundraising activities, the government is always quick on the draw, but when it comes to putting an end to pimping out young girls, forget it.

Yesterday we learned that the Minister of Justice is considering rewriting Bill C-452 on human trafficking, even though that bill has the support of all political parties, the Senate, and the Prime Minister himself.

Why does the Minister of Justice refuse to protect young victims now, and why is she hiding behind the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms?

February 23rd, 2016 / 4:35 p.m.
See context

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Marilyn Gladu

Yes, and I think it would be fine to add the things that we heard today as well. Human trafficking is one area that I heard about today, as well as cyberbullying and picture-sharing, the digital threat, and the hypersexualization of women and girls. On Bill C-452, it sounded as though the minister was going to address that one. I wrote down “section 300 of the Criminal Code”. I didn't know if that was something they were addressing or whether that would be something for us.

Certainly I can put together the list, and the clerk will translate it into both official languages and submit it to you. Then we could come back and take a look at the list, having prioritized it that way. Is that the preferred method?

Go ahead, Ms. Malcolmson.

February 23rd, 2016 / 4:05 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Patty Hajdu Liberal Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON

As you know, our government has been monitoring and is aware of the situation in Quebec, where young women have gone missing, and of course we send our thoughts and our prayers to the families and the young women who are in this situation. It's always a tragedy when children disappear, particularly in circumstances of possible exploitation or danger, as most of the cases we've heard across the country indicate.

Our government takes human trafficking and the exploitation of women extremely seriously. We're very committed to strengthening our efforts to combat this problem, and that's why we've committed to the inquiry in particular. We know that many women have reported the experience of being trafficked in terms of the challenges they face.

We're committed to working with our provinces and our territories, indigenous communities, law enforcement, and community organizations to combat the exploitation and to support victims and potential victims.

We're committed to achieving Bill C-452's important objectives quickly and responsibly. We are right now examining whether and how the reforms in Bill C-452 can be brought into force. We do support the principle of Bill C-452, but we have some concerns that parts of the bill may be in conflict with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. I anticipate we'll hear back from the relevant ministers as we go forward with that examination.

February 23rd, 2016 / 4:05 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Karen Ludwig Liberal New Brunswick Southwest, NB

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Madam Minister.

I have two questions, actually. One is a follow-up to Ms. Harder's question about exploitation and trafficking of persons. Can you provide, or would you provide, any update regarding Bill C-452, an act to amend the Criminal Code (exploitation and trafficking in persons)?

February 23rd, 2016 / 10:30 a.m.
See context

Liberal

Colin Fraser Liberal West Nova, NS

Thank you very much, Chair.

Thank you very much for coming in and for your presentation.

I know that Bill C-452 seeks to amend the Criminal Code to make it provide for consecutive sentences for offences related to exploitation and trafficking in persons.

Could you share your views on this bill, which may well be deemed unconstitutional, and on the possible links with section 4.1 of the Department of Justice Act?

Human TraffickingStatements By Members

February 19th, 2016 / 11:15 a.m.
See context

Conservative

Alain Rayes Conservative Richmond—Arthabaska, QC

Mr. Speaker, since the beginning of the week, all parties in the House have been calling on the Prime Minister to enact Bill C-452 on human trafficking, a bill that received royal assent after it was passed unanimously in the House.

Mothers of young girls who are controlled by street gangs wrote to the Prime Minister directly this week. My fear is that the Liberal government is refusing to sign the order in council because the bill was not introduced by the Liberal party. That would not be worthy of a government and a Prime Minister that should be making decisions for the good of the people.

In the words of the hon. member who introduced this bill in 2011, the broad parliamentary debate has already taken place and the law is ready. It is time for the Liberal government to set partisanship aside and sign the order. It would take five minutes and would help countless young girls.

JusticeOral Questions

February 17th, 2016 / 2:55 p.m.
See context

Charlottetown P.E.I.

Liberal

Sean Casey LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada

Mr. Speaker, these young women and their families are in our thoughts and prayers. The disappearance of a child is a tragedy, especially in these circumstances. We are determined to achieve the important objectives of Bill C-452.

I can guarantee that we will quickly take action that is in keeping with our values and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Human TraffickingAdjournment Proceedings

February 16th, 2016 / 6:50 p.m.
See context

Charlottetown P.E.I.

Liberal

Sean Casey LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada

Mr. Speaker, our government is closely following the situation in Quebec, where young women have disappeared. Our thoughts and prayers go out to these young women and their families.

We take human trafficking and the exploitation of women and girls very seriously. We are determined to build on the action we are taking to address this problem, so that some of the most vulnerable members of society have better protection. That is why we promised to hold an inquiry into missing and murdered indigenous women and girls.

Regrettably, the recruitment of children for the purposes of sexual exploitation and human trafficking remains a serious concern. It is a tragedy when a child disappears, particularly in circumstances that suggest the possibility of exploitation. The whole country shares the relief of parents whose daughters have been safely recovered in recent weeks. We are committed to working with provinces and territories, indigenous communities, law enforcement, and community organizations to combat exploitation and to support victims and potential victims.

While we support the principle of Bill C-452 to strengthen our criminal justice system's approach to human trafficking, there are some parts of the bill that raise concerns.

If the bill were to come into force, it would require that the sentence imposed on a person for the offence of trafficking in persons be served consecutively to any other punishment imposed on the person for an offence arising out of the same event.

There is a real risk that this provision could violate the charter, if applied in combination with the harsh mandatory minimum sentences established in 2014 for the offence of trafficking in persons under the Protection of Communities and Exploited Persons Act, the former Bill C-36.

In conjunction, these two provisions, which impose mandatory sentences, could result in sentences that are disproportionate to the offence and to the justice system's approach to other offences.

This disproportion could infringe on an individual's right to protection from cruel and unusual punishment, as set out in section 12 of the charter. In other words, there is a real risk that this bill could be unconstitutional.

We have committed to carefully review changes to the Criminal Code brought in over the last decade, with a view to determining their compliance with the charter and consistency with our values. We take this commitment very seriously. We will, therefore, take the necessary time to review the bill to ensure that we do not enact anything that may, in the end, be found to be unconstitutional.

We will strengthen our efforts to address human trafficking, which is a complex issue that impacts on some of the most vulnerable members of our society, but we must do so responsibly, in a way that reflects our values and respects the charter. Accordingly, we are currently examining new ways to address this very important issue.

Human TraffickingAdjournment Proceedings

February 16th, 2016 / 6:45 p.m.
See context

NDP

Karine Trudel NDP Jonquière, QC

Mr. Speaker, for several weeks now, there has been a crisis in Quebec that affects our girls. On an almost daily basis, we hear about another girl who has disappeared from a youth centre. Our girls are being targeted not only in youth centres, but also near schools, bus stops and malls. This is a stark reminder that human trafficking is real and is happening here at home. From Laval to Jonquière, no region has been spared. Nobody is safe from this. We must do everything we can to fight sexual exploitation and human trafficking. We must take preventive action, support our girls and ensure that our law enforcement agencies have the resources they need.

The Government of Canada has a role to play. It must make life more difficult for those who exploit our girls. Former MP Maria Mourani, a criminologist and sociologist, did remarkable work to move a bill against human trafficking through the House.

The bill imposes harsher punishments on exploiters. It amends the Criminal Code to achieve three objectives. First, it allows for harsher penalties for exploiters, because it imposes consecutive sentences. Exploiters convicted of several charges today are sentenced only for the most serious of the charges. Under the new legislation, those exploiters would be sentenced for all the charges. Second, the legislation makes it possible to reverse the burden of proof, placing it on the exploiters. Currently, as we heard from a police officer, it is hard to charge someone with sexual exploitation or human trafficking, because it is hard to prove and victims are often reluctant to testify. Lastly, the legislation allows for the seizure of proceeds of crime from anyone convicted of exploitation or human trafficking. This is already done in the case of drug trafficking. It only seems logical that the same sanction apply to human trafficking.

Exploiters are very familiar with the limits of the existing laws. They take advantage of the system while unscrupulously exploiting our girls. It is up to us to stand up and say “enough is enough”.

Bill C-452 was studied and passed by Parliament. All parties voted for this legislation, including the party now in power. Only an order in council is required for this legislation to take effect. That is all, it is simple, and all that is lacking is the will of the government.

Yesterday, Marjolaine Aubé, the mother of a runaway under the thumb of a pimp, who fortunately was found, gave the Prime Minister's office a letter asking him to implement Bill C-452. The letter is signed by five other parents of residents of the youth centre and is a heartfelt appeal. The parents said:

The current situation cannot be tolerated. There are real predators who are attacking young, vulnerable girls...

The broad parliamentary debate has already taken place and the law is ready. We are writing to you as Prime Minister and as a father, so that Law C-452 be applied without delay...

What does the government have to say to the parents? Will it take action to protect our girls?

JusticeOral Questions

February 16th, 2016 / 3 p.m.
See context

Charlottetown P.E.I.

Liberal

Sean Casey LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada

Mr. Speaker, our thoughts and prayers are with those young women and their families. The disappearance of a child is a tragedy, particularly under such circumstances.

We are determined to achieve the important objectives of Bill C-452. I can guarantee that we will act quickly in a way that reflects our values and complies with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

JusticeOral Questions

February 16th, 2016 / 3 p.m.
See context

Bloc

Rhéal Fortin Bloc Rivière-du-Nord, QC

Mr. Speaker, the recent incidents involving runaways from a Laval group home have drawn attention to the plight of vulnerable young girls who are under the control of pimps and have emphasized the urgent need for action.

Bill C-452 was unanimously passed by the House, passed by the Senate and given royal assent by the Governor General, but it is still waiting for a government order to come into force. Nevertheless, it is considered an essential tool for protecting our young people from sexual exploitation.

What is the government waiting for? When will it sign this order and immediately give effect to this bill to combat child prostitution?

June 18th, 2015 / 4:20 p.m.
See context

Conservative

The Speaker Conservative Andrew Scheer

I have the honour to inform the House that when the House did attend His Excellency the Governor General in the Senate Chamber, His Excellency was pleased to give, in Her Majesty's name, the royal assent to the following bills:

Bill C-247, An Act to expand the mandate of Service Canada in respect of the death of a Canadian citizen or Canadian resident—Chapter 15.

Bill C-452, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (exploitation and trafficking in persons)—Chapter 16.

Bill C-591, An Act to amend the Canada Pension Plan and the Old Age Security Act (pension and benefits)—Chapter 17.

Bill S-3, An Act to amend the Coastal Fisheries Protection Act—Chapter 18.

Bill S-6, An Act to amend the Yukon Environmental and Socio-economic Assessment Act and the Nunavut Waters and Nunavut Surface Rights Tribunal Act—Chapter 19.

Bill C-51, An Act to enact the Security of Canada Information Sharing Act and the Secure Air Travel Act, to amend the Criminal Code, the Canadian Security Intelligence Service Act and the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act and to make related and consequential amendments to other Acts—Chapter 20.

Bill C-46, An Act to amend the National Energy Board Act and the Canada Oil and Gas Operations Act—Chapter 21.

Bill C-2, An Act to amend the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act,—Chapter 22.

Bill C-26, An Act to amend the Criminal Code, the Canada Evidence Act and the Sex Offender Information Registration Act, to enact the High Risk Child Sex Offender Database Act and to make consequential amendments to other Acts—Chapter 23.

Bill C-63, An Act to give effect to the Déline Final Self-Government Agreement and to make consequential and related amendments to other Acts—Chapter 24.

Bill C-66, An Act for granting to Her Majesty certain sums of money for the federal public administration for the financial year ending March 31, 2016—Chapter 25.

Bill C-67, An Act for granting to Her Majesty certain sums of money for the federal public administration for the financial year ending March 31, 2016—Chapter 26.

Bill C-42, An Act to amend the Firearms Act and the Criminal Code and to make a related amendment and a consequential amendment to other Acts—Chapter 27.

Bill C-555, An Act respecting the Marine Mammal Regulations (seal fishery observation licence)—Chapter 28.

Bill S-7, An Act to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, the Civil Marriage Act and the Criminal Code and to make consequential amendments to other Acts—Chapter 29.

Bill C-12, An Act to amend the Corrections and Conditional Release Act—Chapter 30.

Bill C-52, An Act to amend the Canada Transportation Act and the Railway Safety Act—Chapter 31.

Bill S-4, An Act to amend the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act and to make a consequential amendment to another Act—Chapter 32.

Bill S-2, An Act to amend the Statutory Instruments Act and to make consequential amendments to the Statutory Instruments Regulations—Chapter 33.

Criminal CodePrivate Members' Business

November 26th, 2013 / 6:45 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Irwin Cotler Liberal Mount Royal, QC

Mr. Speaker, I rise to address Bill C-452, as have my predecessors this evening, which seeks to combat human trafficking and exploitation.

As I have said previously in debate on the bill, the true measure of a society's commitment to equality and human dignity is the protection it affords its most vulnerable members, and the victims of human trafficking are among the most vulnerable of all. It is therefore to the credit of this House that efforts to deal with this compelling concern have been initiated and supported by hon. members on all sides.

I was proud to introduce Canada's original human trafficking legislation, as minister of justice, in 2005, and I am pleased to acknowledge the subsequent and ongoing special contributions of the member for Kildonan—St. Paul, who spoke this evening.

Of course, I would like to thank the member for Ahuntsic for introducing the bill that we are looking at today. I intend to support it.

The bill before us seeks to bolster efforts to combat human trafficking and exploitation in three important ways.

First, by adding these offences of trafficking to those for which the forfeiture of the proceeds of crime applies, the bill seeks to ensure thereby that traffickers do not profit from their actions.

At committee, several witnesses testified that the average annual profit from trafficking one woman is $280,000. Moreover, according to the 2012 U.S. State Department report, the international trade in human beings generates approximately $32 billion each year. It is the fastest growing criminal industry in the world.

Éliane Legault-Roy, from the Concertation des luttes contre l'exploitation sexuelle, testified that this industry “responds solely to profit and customer demand”.

I completely agree that the government must be able to seize the proceeds amassed by those who treat human beings as goods to be sold.

Second, the bill aims to facilitate the prosecution of human trafficking offences by reversing the onus of proof such that an individual habitually in the company of a person who is exploited would be presumed complicit in the exploitation, absent evidence to the contrary.

The justice committee heard from several witnesses that victims in such cases are reluctant to testify in court due to fear of facing their abusers and to the trauma of having to talk openly about their ordeal. It is therefore important to minimize the demands placed on victims in human trafficking trials to prevent their re-victimization, as this provision seeks to do.

At the same time, it is generally a fundamental principle of our justice system that the burden is on the state to prove that the accused is guilty, rather than requiring the accused to prove his or her innocence. The member for Ahuntsic has correctly noted that reversals of the burden of proof do exist in our Criminal Code, but they are rare, and for good reason. Accordingly, reverse onus provisions must be implemented with the utmost caution so as to minimize the risk of wrongful conviction.

As such, the Liberal member on the justice committee proposed amendments that would have specified that the reverse onus in Bill C-452 would apply only to those who live off the avails of exploitation and are over the age of 18. This change would have preserved the bill's intent of lessening the burden on victims at trial while reducing the chances that this reverse onus provision might, in exceptional circumstances, entrap an innocent person. I regret that these amendments were unsuccessful, although, as I say, I will support the bill nonetheless.

Finally, Bill C-452 aims to deter the expansion of human trafficking operations by requiring offenders to serve their sentences consecutively, such that each additional victim represents an additional penalty to the offender. Many witnesses at the justice committee expressed frustration that concurrent sentences are currently the norm in human trafficking cases. For example, Robert Hooper, of Walk With me Canada Victims Services, told the committee:

...when you are able to garner upwards of $200,000 to $300,000 per trafficked victim in one year, and the only real risk in sentencing is a concurrent sentence for each additional victim, the trafficker is almost compelled to expand his business empire with little risk of significant ramifications to him in the criminal justice system here in Canada.

I share the goal of making consecutive sentences the norm for human trafficking convictions. At the same time, I am reluctant to remove discretion from judges, as the bill does, by making consecutive sentences mandatory in all such cases. It is certainly possible to make consecutive sentences the norm while still allowing judges to order concurrent sentences in exceptional cases, providing they give reasons for departing from the usual practice.

This is precisely what a Liberal amendment proposed at committee would have done, and I regret that it, too, was unsuccessful. As with the amendment to which I earlier referred, this one would have preserved the bill's raison d'être while ensuring that our justice system remains well equipped to deal with unusual and unforseeable circumstances. Still, once again, I share the objectives of this legislation and believe that its effects would be generally positive, and I will, as I mentioned, vote in favour of it.

I will now turn to a matter of process that arose at committee and that warrants our attention.

The justice committee began clause-by-clause consideration of Bill C-452 on May 6. At that meeting, the bill's sponsor, the member for Ahuntsic, was present and permitted to speak by the chair. This was both appropriate and helpful for committee members and for all parliamentarians, who benefited from hearing the perspective of the member who proposed the legislation.

However, at the end of the meeting the Conservative members chastised the chair for having let the member for Ahuntsic participate. When clause-by-clause study resumed on May 8, at which time additional amendments were considered and a clause that had previously carried was reviewed and deleted, Conservative committee members refused to allow the member for Ahuntsic to take part in debate on her own bill.

The member for York West moved to let her speak. The government still rejected the motion. In the words of the committee chair, “...for a private member's bill I think every member has the right to come and talk to the bill and the amendments to it. ... I think that's only fair....”

I agree fully, and I find it deeply regrettable that Conservative members denied the member for Ahuntsic the opportunity to address significant changes proposed to her own legislation.

As we know, in most cases the sponsor of a private member's bill can substitute for a colleague from the same party and so participate in committee discussion. However, when the bill is that of an independent member, as happened in this case, that option is not available to them. It is therefore, as the chair said, only fair to invite them as an additional and important voice. The Conservatives' refusal to do so was prejudicial to the principle of open and informed debate, essential to our legislative process. Moreover, the silencing of the member for Ahuntsic constituted a missed opportunity to act in a collegial manner on important legislation that enjoys all-party support.

I would hope that hon. members would take pains to act collegially even when we disagree. How much more so should we seize opportunities such as this to join together in mutual respect and common cause?

In that same spirit, I would like to thank the member for Ahuntsic for introducing this bill.

I thank the member for Kildonan—St. Paul, who made yet another important intervention this evening, and others in the House for their efforts on this issue. I thank the many Canadians, including the witnesses who testified at committee, for their daily efforts to combat human trafficking and to help the survivors of exploitation rebuild their lives.

I will close by importantly recognizing the victims, both those bravely attempting to recover from the horrors of past ordeals and the millions in Canada and around the world who, as we speak, are exploited and enslaved. I look forward to continuing with members of all parties in the fight for their freedom.

Criminal CodePrivate Members' Business

November 26th, 2013 / 6:35 p.m.
See context

NDP

Isabelle Morin NDP Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC

Mr. Speaker, it is with pride and conviction that I, too, support Bill C-452 sponsored by the member for Ahuntsic.

Human trafficking is an issue that I am really passionate about. I have had the opportunity to talk with groups such as CATHII, the International Bureau for Children's Rights, World Vision Canada, Half the Sky Québec and Walk With Me Canada, and also with experts such as Professor Yvon Dandurand, Professor Jill Hanley and Detective Sergeant Dominic Monchamp of the Montreal police force.

I have also listened to evidence from many experts and victims at meetings of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights, and when I travelled to Thailand with World Vision Canada two years ago. As a result of these experiences, I am truly horrified by this serious situation, and I believe that it is urgent that we move quickly to make progress in this area.

For that reason, I support Bill C-452, which would amend the Criminal Code in order to provide better protection for victims of trafficking by setting out a legal definition of exploitation and including consecutive sentences for offences related to procuring and trafficking in persons.

To start with, we must take some time to explain what we are really talking about when we use the words “trafficking” and “exploitation”.

Trafficking in and exploitation of persons is an odious crime that can take several forms. The most common are forcible confinement; forced movement from one country to another, one province to another or one city to another; and forced labour and prostitution, when a profit is made by the person exploiting these victims. What all these crimes have in common is the fact that they are degrading, violate human dignity, and are characterized by incredible abuse, which can be physical, verbal or psychological.

The main victims are women and children, who represent 80% of persons affected by human trafficking, as indicated by a 2005 International Labour Organization study. The most vulnerable are the usual victims of this scourge, and it is our duty to do everything we can to protect them. We must not forget that almost 50% of victims are minors.

Sexual exploitation is the most common form of human exploitation. Once again, women and children are the main victims. In fact, 98% of the victims of sexual exploitation are women. Over half of them are minors.

Canada is not immune to the scourge of human trafficking. We have a real problem of human trafficking and exploitation right here in this country, and yet very few people realize the scope of the problem.

I know because, about a year ago, I showed the film Avenue Zéro in my office. I received many calls and emails from people who said that they had no idea that this was happening in their own backyards. Part of my riding, an area of Notre-Dame-de-Grâce, is unfortunately known for human trafficking and prostitution. However, the general population is completely unaware of this problem.

As for human trafficking across international borders, the most recent official figures from the RCMP date back to 2005, which is quite a while ago. Perhaps more statistics are needed. In fact, the RCMP estimates that every year, about 800 individuals enter Canada illegally as a result of human trafficking, and about 1,500 to 2,000 are trafficked from Canada to the United States.

As for human trafficking within Canada, we do not currently have sufficiently clear and reliable statistics to establish exact figures. The studies done in Canada on human trafficking and exploitation often overlook the issue of trafficking in Canadian citizens and residents within the country.

It is possible, however, to assess the scope of this phenomenon and paint a picture of the people affected by human trafficking and exploitation in Canada based on studies done by international organizations and on the ample testimony of victims.

In 2009, for instance, the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime led a study that found that 80% of the victims of human trafficking are trafficked for the purpose of prostitution. This observation also applies in Canada. Those most affected are women who enter Canada illegally through human trafficking, but Canadian citizens are also affected, including a significant proportion of young women from aboriginal communities. As we know, exploitation is often the result of extreme economic insecurity and a lack of knowledge of individual rights.

Like these hundreds of people who enter Canada each year to flee deplorable living conditions in their country of origin, a growing number of Canadians are faced with poverty and limited access to education. Every year, poverty pushes young girls from disadvantaged communities and aboriginal peoples to move to urban centres and leave their families behind. They are easy prey, for pimps in particular who force them to sell their bodies no matter how old they are.

The figures provided by Criminal Intelligence Service Canada on this are clear: the average age of entry into prostitution in our country is 14. As my colleague mentioned, if the age of entry into prostitution is 14, that means there are clients requesting 14-year-old girls, which is absolutely disgusting.

In light of the gravity of the facts and the extent of the tragedy, I think it is necessary to act as quickly as possible. We must remain focused because solving the problem of trafficking and exploitation requires a comprehensive strategy, including reducing the economic inequalities in our country and fighting the organized crime that is at the root of human trafficking worldwide.

Nevertheless, I know that Bill C-452 introduced by my colleague, the hon. member for Ahuntsic, is a first step in the right direction. Her bill considerably improves the legal avenues we have for fighting exploitation and it sends a clear message to human trafficking abusers and victims: we will not allow the current situation to go on much longer.

I support the legal approach taken by Bill C-452. The bill's proposed changes to sections 279.01 and 462.27 of the Criminal Code are essential for giving our police officers and our lawyers the means for effectively fighting human exploitation and trafficking.

First, the new section 279.01 would give the justice system the necessary tools for identifying cases of exploitation, through a complete list of circumstances that are deemed to constitute exploitation. That said, Bill C-452 provides a clearer and more precise definition of exploitation to ensure better victim protection. The changes made to section 462.27 of the Criminal Code, which seek to introduce offences of procuring and human trafficking, will enable more effective police action.

Bill C-452 would give the police and our justice system the means to work together to successfully combat human trafficking and exploitation. I had the opportunity to listen to Inspector Gordon Perrier, from the Criminal Investigation Bureau of the Winnipeg Police Service, when he testified before the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights in April. He said the following: “Combatting exploitation requires a broad range of commitments on many fronts, and all the practices police and our partners employ come together when the laws are comprehensive”.

I am absolutely convinced that, in addition to being a significant legal breakthrough in the fight against human trafficking, Bill C-452 also holds great symbolic value. Indeed, it sends a strong signal to victims of human trafficking—to women, especially aboriginal women. There is an opportunity here to refocus the law on victim protection by providing for denunciatory and consecutive sentences, which the accused must serve consecutively to any other sentence handed down by a judge.

Indeed, making the perpetrators spend more time in prison gives their victims enough time to begin their healing process, with greater peace. In doing this, we show our commitment to uphold human dignity. When we fight human trafficking we are fighting against the commodification of women and children, who are now being imported and exported, sold and resold. We are also fighting against the commodification of men who are forced to work, and against the sexual exploitation of the weakest and poorest by unscrupulous individuals and organized crime.

To conclude, I would like to take the time to talk about human trafficking for forced labour, which we might call “slavery”. In my riding, I know that there are both domestic and seasonal workers who come to Canada and are forced to work. This is not sexual exploitation; although it was mentioned that sexual exploitation accounts for 80% to 90% of cases, there are all kinds of trafficking, which Bill C-452 is designed to reduce as much as possible.

I also think that we will soon need to talk about prevention, because when some young women arrive in cities and urban areas, they often fall into prostitution at the age of 14, through no fault of their own. We should therefore start working on prevention with these young women.

Criminal CodePrivate Members' Business

November 26th, 2013 / 6:30 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Joy Smith Conservative Kildonan—St. Paul, MB

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to have the opportunity to support Bill C-452, an Act to amend the Criminal Code (exploitation and trafficking in persons). This is an important bill that would address a pressing issue. Human trafficking involves continuous violations of fundamental human rights whose protection forms the basis of our free and democratic society.

I would like to start by thanking the member of Parliament for Ahuntsic for bringing this pressing issue to the attention of the House again. As she knows, this is a very important issue for our government. Her previous bill, former Bill C-612, an Act to amend the Criminal Code (trafficking in persons), which proposed similar amendments, died on the order paper in 2011.

Before I turn to the proposals in the bill itself, I would like to make some general comments on the nature of human trafficking and its severe impacts on its victims, to underscore the importance of ensuring the strongest possible criminal justice response to this crime.

Traffickers force victims to provide labour or sexual services in circumstances where they believe their safety or the safety of someone known to them will be threatened if they fail to provide that labour or service. They are deprived of the very rights that underpin a free and democratic society. The reality is that victims suffer physical, sexual and emotional abuse, including threats of violence or actual harm to their loved ones. This abuse is compounded by their living and working conditions.

To further aggravate the problem, this type of criminal conduct is not something that just happens occasionally or on the margins of society. Rather it is widespread, as evidenced by the global revenues garnered by it, which are estimated to amount to as much as $10 billion U.S. per year. This puts human trafficking within the three top money makers for organized crime.

What are we doing about it? I am pleased to report that the government's response to this crime is strong and multi-faceted.

First, we have a virtual arsenal of criminal offences that apply to this reprehensible conduct.

In 2003, trafficking specific offences were added to the Criminal Code.

In 2010, a new offence of child trafficking was enacted through Bill C-268, an Act to amend the Criminal Code (minimum sentence for offences involving trafficking of persons under the age of eighteen years), which was sponsored by myself, the member for Kildonan—St. Paul. This offence imposes mandatory minimum penalties on those who traffic persons under the age of 18.

In 2012, former Bill C-310, an Act to amend the Criminal Code (trafficking in persons), sponsored by myself, the member of Parliament for Kildonan—St. Paul, extended extra territorial jurisdiction for all Criminal Code trafficking offences and enacted an interpretive tool to assist the courts in interpreting the trafficking in persons provisions.

All of this is in addition to the trafficking specific offence contained in the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, section 118, which prohibits transnational trafficking and the numerous Criminal Code offences that address traffic related conduct, such as forceable confinement, kidnapping, sexual assault and uttering threats, to give a few examples.

However, that is not all. In recognition of the multi-faceted nature of this problem, the government launched a national action plan to combat human trafficking on June 6, 2012. The action plan recognizes that a comprehensive response to human trafficking must involve efforts to ensure what we refer to as the 4 Ps: the protection of victims; the prosecution of offenders; the partnerships with key players; and, of course, the prevention of the crime, in the first place. All activities are coordinated through the human trafficking task force, which is led by Public Safety Canada.

This is, without a doubt, a comprehensive response to a complex problem, but more can always be done and where more can be done, more should be done, especially, when efforts serve to address a crime as insidious as human trafficking.

Bill C-452 proposes a number of reforms that would strengthen the response I have just described. It seeks to impose consecutive sentences for trafficking offences and any offence arising out of the same event or series of events.

The bill would also create a presumption that would assist prosecutors in proving the main human trafficking offence and it would require a sentencing court to order the forfeiture of an offender's property, unless he or she proved that the property was not proceeds of crime.

Although some amendments would be required to address specific legal concerns, Bill C-452 would undoubtedly strengthen the response to human trafficking and, as such, merits our support.

Legal concerns would have to be addressed. For example, the bill should not overlap with amendments that have already been enacted by the previous bill, such as the former Bill C-310, as this would cause confusion in the law. The bill should also avoid compromising the government's efforts to defend the living on the avails offence, paragraph 212(1)(j), along with other prostitution-related Criminal Code offences whose constitutionality is now before the Supreme Court of Canada in the Bedford case. The procuring provision, which Bill C-452 proposals would affect, contains the living on the avails offence.

However, these concerns and others should not detract from the positive contributions the bill would make if it were enacted. The legal concerns I have outlined can easily be addressed through amendments.

We must continue to be vigilant. We must continue to support legislative initiatives that would improve our ability to hold accountable those who exploit the vulnerabilities of others. The impact of human trafficking on its victims is almost impossible to comprehend. We cannot tolerate it. We must ensure that those who engage in such heinous conduct are brought to justice, that their punishment appropriately reflects their crime and that they are not permitted to reap the rewards gleaned from the suffering of others.

Toward that end, I ask all members in the House to join me in supporting Bill C-452. I look forward to examining and analyzing its proposals more deeply in the context of committee review. At that stage, amendments can be moved to ensure that the bill achieves its laudable objectives without creating any confusion or inconsistency in the law.

I am sure that we all agree that we can never do enough to combat human trafficking. I am grateful that Bill C-452 has provided us with yet another opportunity to do more.

Again, I thank the member for Ahuntsic for her attention to this very important bill. Certainly it has our full support on this side of the House.

Criminal CodePrivate Members' Business

November 26th, 2013 / 6:15 p.m.
See context

Independent

Maria Mourani Independent Ahuntsic, QC

moved that Bill C-452, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (exploitation and trafficking in persons), be read the third time and passed.

Mr. Speaker, as you know, this is not the first time we are debating this bill. It received the unanimous support of the House during the previous debates, and all along I have tried to ensure that it remain non-partisan and that it bring people together. The humour in this is not lost on me and I take a philosophical approach as this bill reaches the final stage while I sit as an independent member.

I want to thank everyone who shared their skills and put their hearts into creating this bill, including police officers, the women's groups that work with victims of trafficking, and the criminal law experts and parliamentary law clerks. I thank everyone. I would also like to thank all of my colleagues in the House for the support they have given this bill, speech after speech, stage after stage. I thank them for agreeing to send this bill as quickly as possible to the Senate.

We will not be able to fix the problem of human trafficking unless we address the root issue, which is prostitution. We all know that more than 80% to 90% of human trafficking victims in Canada are trafficked for the purpose of sexual exploitation. The September 2013 report from the Service du renseignement criminel du Quebec revealed that the sex industry in Quebec is doing better than ever. This report highlighted a huge increase in the number of massage parlours: there are more than 200 of them in Montreal. The report states that 39% of the victims caught are minors and that 91% of the victims are women. The numbers are similar in other Canadian provinces.

The average age—

Human TraffickingPetitionsRoutine Proceedings

November 8th, 2013 / 12:10 p.m.
See context

NDP

Françoise Boivin NDP Gatineau, QC

Mr. Speaker, I rise to present a petition to the House in support of Bill C-452 to combat human trafficking and sexual exploitation. Some people may be surprised to learn that the proceeds of crime related to human trafficking are estimated at $32 billion a year. That is significant, which is why I would like to present this petition.

Criminal CodePrivate Members' Business

June 18th, 2013 / 6:50 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Joy Smith Conservative Kildonan—St. Paul, MB

Mr. Speaker, I would very much like to again thank the member for Ahuntsic for Bill C-452. It is a very important bill. We have talked tonight about the importance of the bill, including the consecutive sentencing and the things in the bill that would enhance the Criminal Code here in our country. That is very important. Our government, on this side of the House, is supporting this bill.

I would like to comment on some of the other comments that have been put forth in this House.

Just a week ago I led the Canadian delegation against human trafficking to Ukraine, which was hosting a meeting on human trafficking, where 52 countries attended. As I was sitting there, each country's representatives were talking about what happens to the victims of human trafficking who are pushed into brothels. The member for Ahuntsic spoke very eloquently about what happened to the girls, young women and young men who are forced into those brothels. For one moment, parliamentarians and people from non-governmental organizations from all across the nations were sitting together and talking about what we all know.

Up on the screen came the gateways and routes that the human traffickers use with their victims. They were all over the map. In Canada the traffickers use certain routes where they send their victims, who go through their own private hell.

What a lot of people do not know is that the traffickers target young people under 18 years of age. Why? It is because they are easy to manipulate and scare and control, and they are afraid and ashamed. As soon as they have serviced one man, they are afraid and ashamed, and the predators use that so that they can manipulate and coerce the girls.

A victim brings in between $250,000 and $260,000 per year to the predator. That is really a lot of money. If they have one victim it is one thing, but many of the predators have a lot of victims whom they traffic across this country.

For one moment in this Parliament tonight, I would like members to imagine their own daughter or grandchild and how they relate to them, or how members of the community listening to this telecast tonight relate to their whole families. These are children who watched Sesame Street as young children. These are children who give hugs when they go to bed at night. Then they become beautiful young girls and beautiful young boys, and that is when they are targeted.

I want all parliamentarians to know how predators work. The predators approach their victims in a very friendly manner and get their trust. Their objective is to get the victims' trust so that they can start influencing them. Sometimes it is young men or women who give the kids anything they want. It can be friendship. It can be parties. It can sometimes be drugs. It can be a lot of things, but the objective is to get them away from their support systems. Those support systems can be schools, families, friends or sports teams. They want to get them away and separate them from their support systems. Once they get them away, they persuade them to give them their identification, which can be drivers licences, charge cards or other things.

If parliamentarians think it cannot happen to the girl next door or to their own families, they would be mistaken. Hundreds of young girls have shared with me the terrible experience they have gone through, and to this day they have not told their parents.

It marks the victims forever. A lot of these girls never really get over it, but they do grow and become rehabilitated to a degree, and they do a lot to help others who are in the same predicament.

Therefore, when we talk about Bill C-452 tonight, let us put a face to the real people it would affect, the real people who have to live with it day to day, the real people who tonight are suffering not 10 minutes from Parliament Hill. We know of the very well-known case here in Ottawa with Mrs. Emerson, and there are other cases in Ottawa. The victims were manipulated. As parliamentarians, we have the wherewithal to take up the torch and stop this horrendous crime.

In Ukraine, 52 countries said they had the ability to stop human trafficking and they would do it.

As I was sitting in Kiev, Ukraine, there came an email from Calgary, Alberta. The email indicated that Staff Sergeant Rutledge and the Calgary police had taken down a trafficking ring and rescued some kids. I stopped the meeting and I read the email to the people in attendance. There was not a dry eye in the place. These high-profile, high-level conference people knew what this was all about. I told them that was the reason we were in Kiev that day, and I say to members tonight that it is the reason we are here in Parliament tonight working together as parliamentarians to stop this horrendous crime.

Criminal CodePrivate Members' Business

June 18th, 2013 / 6:40 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Lise St-Denis Liberal Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC

Mr. Speaker, the introduction of the human trafficking bill, which the Liberal Party supports, calls the attention of the House to the darkest aspects of the human soul. All over the world, women, children and men are deprived of their freedom and dignity. Examples of mistreatment and abuse abound in many countries, on every continent.

It is almost impossible to restrict human trafficking within a country, a city or a community. Children are forced to become soldiers in regional conflicts. Women are sexually exploited in the western world. Men toil in farming operations in the new world and the old. We powerlessly witness the proliferation of the most diverse forms of exploitation.

In earlier centuries, the slave trade was the bedrock of colonial settlement. From Santo Domingo to Haiti to Senegal to the Andean countries to the confines of Asia, this form of human exploitation prospered everywhere. We wrongly believed that eliminating the major slave trade networks from the colonial period had for all practical purposes disappeared.

However, the world today still appears to be heavily imbued with the stench of neocolonialism, in which servitude plays a fundamental role in the underpinnings of our economies.

Nowadays, efforts are being made to identify the contours of these new exploitation networks that have become an essential component of our production, distribution and consumption systems.

Children toiling on machines to produce consumer goods can be counted in the thousands. Countless women sell their bodies working for pimps. Thousands of exploited men work on tenant farms and unsanitary farms until they reach exhaustion.

All these products and services can be used to bind, exploit, abuse and discriminate. All these girls and women are raped and held against their will because of power relationships and the absence of justice.

A new bill has been added to the order paper to take away some of the latitude available to exploiters and abusers. Bill C-452 asks a fundamental question about trafficking in persons: what can be done to curb a growing phenomenon that has been taking the most unexpected forms?

By becoming more interdependent, the world can work to further advance the principles that underpin democratic regimes on the one hand, while on the other hand, it allows the proliferation of criminal systems for exploiting people. Canada's role in protecting people has been made increasingly complex as a result of the new human mobility provided by modern modes of transportation.

How can children be protected from compulsory service in armed conflicts? To be sure, concerted action has been taken by the nations of the world, at the instigation of exemplary people like General Roméo Dallaire who urge us to draw up international conventions and treaties.

Something must also be done to address the exploitation of stateless people who should have real access to international labour organizations.

Sexually exploited women should not simply be sent back, beyond our borders, but rather given our protection and the protection of other nations of the free world.

However, while Canada's ratification of the Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women and Children, supplementing the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime is a step in the right direction, it must be based on criminal penalties designed to restrict the latitude of all kinds of abusers and exploiters.

This bill and its aims are certainly compelling.

We are attentive to the needs of the victims of this system of exploitation, and we believe that the elected members of this House are all aware of the social havoc wrought by human trafficking.

In another age, abolitionist legislation could have a definite effect. The centuries-long slavery of the colonialists of the past no longer exists, but has transformed itself into a modern form that is insidious and far-reaching.

We are wholeheartedly behind this bill and its goal of eliminating trafficking in children, women and men. We support this battle for freedom and dignity. However, given the scale of the phenomenon and its highly sinister ramifications, we are bound to note the limitations of our judicial intervention.

Mankind now has the financial and technical resources to eliminate human trafficking, but does it have the necessary awareness and empathy to do so?

The debate generated here by these amendments to the Criminal Code necessarily goes beyond the boundaries of parliamentary life. This is a step in the right direction. However, are the provisions for consecutive sentences contained in this bill, and the presumption of guilt established by living with an exploited person contrary to the principle this bill seeks to defend?

In Canada, in recent years, we have unfortunately seen significant restrictions placed on judicial discretion with respect to sentencing under the Criminal Code.

How can we reconcile the elimination of human trafficking systems with respect for the fundamental rights entrenched in the Canadian charter? How can we reconcile the new criminal restrictions on present-day servitude and slavery with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights?

We face a tremendous challenge: that of aligning our domestic legislation with the great humanist principles that guide our society. We can only be inspired by our colleague’s initiative, as she searches with us for a solution to this scourge. We believe that the elimination of these practices demands further political action along the lines of what we find in the form of this bill.

Federal policy in this area is unequivocal with respect to the educational effort required here and abroad in order to change these appalling behaviours. An inventory of the various types of human trafficking in Canada is contained in a report published in 2010 that leaves no doubt about the dimensions of modern slavery and the forms it takes.

We can only embrace this 21st-century challenge of restoring to millions of individuals a place and the resources to live their lives in dignity and respect. We must therefore be vigilant in everything we do that has an impact on the victims of human trafficking. Our refugee protection policies, our foreign policy, our financial investments and our criminal justice system are all things that can definitely contribute to the elimination of human trafficking.

I repeat: the Liberal Party will support this bill.

Criminal CodePrivate Members' Business

June 18th, 2013 / 6:30 p.m.
See context

NDP

Hoang Mai NDP Brossard—La Prairie, QC

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to rise today to talk about Bill C-452, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (exploitation and trafficking in persons).

I would first like to congratulate the member for Ahuntsic on the work she has done. I know that she has worked extremely hard on this bill, which she tabled in Parliament so that we could debate and discuss it. She may rest assured that the NDP will support it.

Such a bill naturally generates a great deal of emotion. I had the good fortune, as deputy justice critic, to sit on the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights. Some of the evidence was so touching that it left us shaking. It made us realize certain things. The victims who came to testify have all my admiration. I would like once again to salute the courage they showed in coming to share their experiences in order to give us a better understanding of what is happening on that front.

We also heard from numerous experts, people working in community organizations and people in law enforcement. Those working in the field emphasized the importance of this bill. They felt it was something that could really attack the problem of human trafficking, a problem that exists in Canada. We all agree that it is a heinous crime and that we must amend the Criminal Code in order to deal with it. This is one more step in that direction.

Witnesses talked about the lack of resources. It is all very well to have a bill, but you have to have the necessary resources on the ground. In that respect, we shall continue to pressure the government. This will not be just a bill and some words. We must have the means to attack the problem.

I am going to talk quickly about what this bill offers, since we are at third reading, and we have already supported it.

Bill C-452 would amend the Criminal Code in order to provide consecutive sentences for offences related to trafficking in persons. It would create a presumption regarding the exploitation of one person by another. It would also add circumstances that would be deemed to constitute exploitation. It would add the offence of trafficking in persons to the list of offences to which the forfeiture of proceeds of crime would apply.

Witnesses stressed the importance of the changes made in the Criminal Code. It was just as important to create a presumption and attack the problem of financial resources. The topic of consecutive sentences is always somewhat controversial, but it is something we can nevertheless support because we are talking about very serious crimes.

What is human trafficking, in broader terms? This is the RCMP's definition:

Human trafficking involves the recruitment, transportation or harbouring of persons for the purpose of exploitation (typically in the sex industry or for forced labour). Traffickers use various methods to maintain control over their victims, including force, sexual assault, threats of violence and physical or emotional abuse.

I raised this question with the bill’s sponsor. It is important to address sexual exploitation, but forced labour is also a very serious factor. While it may be more serious abroad, the problem does exist in Canada.

In committee, therefore, it was important for me to emphasize that the problem exists here. Fortunately, this bill covers trafficking in people who do forced labour. In some cases, this involves domestic work. In committee, the testimony of the victims was very touching. It was highly emotional. It was obvious that many people were affected.

When listening to anyone who has been a kidnapping victim speak about their experience, no one can remain unmoved by their story. Once again, I wish to say how much I admire the victims who are willing to talk about it. It is important to do so, to look for help and to discuss the problem so that we can be aware of the severity of the problem and the need to take action. Everyone, including ordinary people and law enforcement agencies, needs to know that parliamentarians are there to support and listen to them.

As for human trafficking, the RCMP estimates that some 600 women and children enter Canada each year through trafficking for sexual exploitation and that this figure increases to 800 when those who enter illegally for other forms of forced labour are included. Once again, I wish to point out that there are two aspects to human trafficking.

Most of the time, the victims are, of course, exploited women. What is even worse in my view is the fact that many of them are aboriginal women. There is a real problem here. The government has been mightily criticized because of the shortage of resources for aboriginal communities. This is yet another sign that there are problems. We would therefore like the government to work harder and to provide the resources needed to address this scourge.

Needless to say, it is essential to work together with the first nations, Inuit and Métis to attack the problem proactively and combat human trafficking. Unfortunately, when funding for these communities is cut, things only become worse.

As I was saying, we tend to think that human trafficking only affects foreign countries and that it cannot possibly exist in a country as developed as Canada. Yet it does. In my riding of Brossard—La Prairie I met people from the bar association in Longueil who explained to me clearly that in some areas, like the DIX30 complex, the problem—this scourge—existed. This demonstrates just how real it is. That is why I am proud to support this bill so that the problem can be addressed.

The reason I mentioned my own riding is that we all, as parliamentarians, need to realize that we are surrounded by these problems. We need to open our eyes and talk about them. That is why I take a great deal of pride today in speaking about these issues and being willing to address them.

I briefly mentioned resources. Providing resources is very important. We need a plan that will mobilize the police and that will also provide them with the resources they need to truly attack this problem. I said that the bill was a step in the right direction, but the people who work in the field need resources.

Unfortunately, it is important to look at what is actually happening. Once again, I will take an example from my riding. I learned that there was an Eclipse squad, a team of 10 to 15 police officers from several municipalities working specifically to combat street gangs, and all of this exploitation and human trafficking. Surprisingly, however, the federal government eliminated funding for the project. This was on April 1, 2013. What they told me in the field was that these people had to return to their offices. They had to walk away from all the expertise they had built up. They now need to work on their own on certain cases without the benefit of all the expertise that had been available.

It is all very well to have a bill that is moving in this direction, but resources are also needed. The government is clearly not headed in the right direction. It is hypocritical for the government to claim it is fighting and introducing bills when there is no evidence of funding to do the work. I gave the example of a group that was working in my riding. I find it deplorable.

I would like to conclude by saying that human trafficking is an important matter.

We in the NDP do not believe that this is a partisan issue. That is why we are proud to support the bill to tackle this scourge.

Criminal CodePrivate Members' Business

June 18th, 2013 / 6:20 p.m.
See context

Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe New Brunswick

Conservative

Robert Goguen ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise in support of private member's Bill C-452, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (exploitation and trafficking in persons). I would like to thank the member for Ahuntsic for introducing this important piece of legislation.

The purpose of Bill C-452 is essentially to step up the criminal justice system's response to human trafficking, one of the most odious violations of fundamental rights and freedoms.

It is generally acknowledged that trafficking in persons occurs in three stages: the recruitment, transportation and accommodation of a person for a specific purpose; exploitation, usually sexual exploitation; and forced labour. The existence of one of these factors is enough for a person's conduct to constitute the crime of trafficking in persons. A person who recruits a victim for the purpose of exploiting that person is engaged in human trafficking to the same degree as someone who transports or houses a victim for that purpose.

Traffickers force victims to work or provide services in circumstances in which they believe that any refusal on their part would threaten their safety or that of a person they know. The expression “labour or a service” includes, for example, all types of sexual services, domestic services, agricultural work and factory work.

Victims suffer physical, sexual and psychological violence and face threats of violence against family members, including violence or threats of physical violence that may be carried out.

A crime this serious requires that more rigorous measures be taken in criminal law. My colleague, the member for Kildonan—St. Paul, has introduced two bills to combat these reprehensible crimes. We must all stand up and help the victims of human trafficking.

I see that the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights made amendments to this bill. I believe my colleague who introduced the bill is of the view that those amendments contribute to the bill's main objectives, particularly those of making offenders accountable for their acts, providing for penalties that reflect the seriousness of the crime and ensuring that offenders do not reap the benefits of their unlawful acts.

Before commenting on the specific proposals contained in the bill and explaining why I believe they deserve to be supported, I would like to put them in context. This bill would make it possible to expand the exhaustive framework of statutory provisions against trafficking in persons.

In 2005, three specific human trafficking offences were added to the Criminal Code. In 2010, a new offence of trafficking in children was adopted when Bill C-268 sponsored by the member for Kildonan—St. Paul was enacted. An offender convicted of that offence is liable to mandatory minimum penalties when trafficking victims are under 18 years of age.

In 2012, another bill sponsored by the member for Kildonan—St. Paul granted extraterritorial jurisdiction over all Criminal Code trafficking offences and created a tool to assist the courts in interpreting the human trafficking provisions.

In addition, section 118 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act prohibits transnational trafficking in persons, and many acts related to trafficking in persons, such as forcible confinement, kidnapping, sexual assault and uttering threats, to cite only a few examples, are offences under the Criminal Code.

However, it is possible to do more. Bill C-452 provides, first of all, for the creation of an evidentiary presumption that would help prosecutors establish that trafficking in persons has been committed. We know that victims are vulnerable and that they fear their traffickers. That means that they may well be reluctant to testify, and we understand that.

The presumption would allow prosecutors to establish the commission of the offence of trafficking in persons by submitting evidence that an accused lives with or is habitually in the company of a person who is exploited.

The Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights amended this proposal to make it compatible with other similar presumptions currently set out in the Criminal Code, particularly subsection 212(3), which establishes a presumption for the purposes of procuring provisions, namely paragraph 212(1)(j), and subsections 212(2) and 212(2.1).

Prosecutors also find it difficult to establish that the offence was committed because victims in these situations are often too afraid of their pimps to testify against them.

In 1992, the Supreme Court of Canada upheld the constitutional validity of this presumption in R. v. Downey. The final submissions of the majority are significant and directly relevant to trafficking in persons:

Prostitutes are a particularly vulnerable segment of society. The cruel abuse they suffer inflicted by their parasitic pimps has been well documented. The impugned section is aimed not only at remedying a social problem but also at providing some measure of protection for the prostitute by eliminating the necessity of testifying.

Surely the same considerations apply to the victims of human trafficking.

Bill C-452 also provides that a sentence handed down for an offence involving trafficking in persons shall be served consecutively to any other punishment imposed on the person for another offence arising out of the same event or series of events. Establishing mandatory consecutive sentencing sends a clear message: committing an offence leads to a long prison term. Is this not a message we want to send to the perpetrators of human trafficking offences? There are few crimes that deserve such lengthy sentences. I applaud this proposal.

Bill C-452 would also require an offender to prove that his property does not constitute proceeds of crime for the purposes of the Criminal Code forfeiture provisions. Trafficking in persons necessarily involves profiting from the suffering of others. In fact, global revenues generated by this crime are estimated at some $10 U.S. billion a year. That is unacceptable.

Trafficking in persons is thus one of the three most lucrative organized crime activities. We must ensure that traffickers are not allowed to keep their ill-gotten gains. It is essential that we strip them of the monetary benefits they derive from the exploitation of others so that the public can trust in the justice system's ability to hold offenders accountable for their actions and to bring them to justice. Justice is not served if an offender is allowed to profit from the suffering he inflicts on others.

The provisions of Bill C-452 contribute to the existing legislative framework to fight this crime, supplemented by a multi-pronged response to a complex problem.

I am particularly pleased to note that, on June 6, 2012, the government introduced the national action plan to combat human trafficking, which acknowledges that an exhaustive approach must be taken to consolidate efforts to fight this crime by emphasizing the four Ps: the protection of victims, the prosecution of offenders, partnerships with key stakeholders and, of course, the prevention of trafficking in persons.

All activities are coordinated by the working group on trafficking in persons, which is managed by Public Safety Canada. This shows that Canada is currently taking a strong approach to human trafficking. However, that does not mean that we cannot do more. We must be vigilant and do everything in our power to ensure that our approach is as rigorous as possible, which inevitably presupposes ongoing analysis to determine what else we can do.

Bill C-452 is precisely an example of what else we can do. We can support Bill C-452, which would assist in securing convictions, guaranteeing penalties that are proportionate to the severity of the crime and depriving offenders of their ill-gotten gains.

I believe that all members of the House should join me in supporting this bill.

Criminal CodePrivate Members' Business

June 18th, 2013 / 6 p.m.
See context

Bloc

Maria Mourani Bloc Ahuntsic, QC

moved that Bill C-452, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (exploitation and trafficking in persons), be read the third time and passed.

Mr. Speaker, I must say that it is a great victory that Bill C-452, a private member's bill, has made it as far as third reading. It is not my victory, but that of many groups. I feel it is important to name them because they are the ones who worked hard to develop this bill and who supported it throughout the process.

They are: the Council on the Status of Women, police experts from the SPVM morality branch and child sexual exploitation unit, the Comité d'action contre la traite humaine interne et internationale, the Association féminine d'éducation et d'action sociale, the Regroupement québécois des centres d'aide et de lutte contre les agressions à caractère sexuel, Concertation-Femme, Concertation des luttes contre l'exploitation sexuelle, the Association québécoise Plaidoyer-Victimes, the Collectif de l'Outaouais contre l'exploitation sexuelle, the diocèse de l'Outaouais, Maison de Marthe and the YMCAs of Quebec.

Many groups participated in the development of this bill. I thank them very much and I commend them for all the work that they did. These groups also appeared before the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights to explain the importance of this bill and, in particular, the results it will achieve on the ground.

I would like to quickly mention the things that came up in committee that I found a bit surprising, since a significant number of amendments were made to the bill. First, no major changes were made to the provisions related to human trafficking, whether with regard to presumption or the reversal of the burden of proof, consecutive sentences for offences related to trafficking in persons, or the forfeiture of the proceeds of crime for people who are charged with human trafficking. These provisions did not really change, and that is a good thing.

The provision regarding the definition of sexual exploitation was changed. A government amendment removed this provision on the basis that it could make the definition hard to understand. These were not major changes. The principles underlying the provisions on human trafficking stayed the same. I am very pleased about that.

By the way, the NDP did not propose any amendments. The Liberals proposed amendments that were rejected and that I did not support either, and the majority of the amendments proposed by the Conservatives were kept since the Conservatives have the majority. Nonetheless, some of the amendments they proposed were supported by the NDP and the Liberals.

One of the government's amendments leaves me extremely perplexed. It is the amendment that replaced our wish to have the bill come into force 30 days after royal assent. The government's amendment would have the bill come into force on a day to be fixed by order of the Governor in Council. It seems that the government wants to control the implementation of the bill.

If the bill receives royal assent, I hope that it will come into force very quickly because, as all the witnesses said, this is an urgent matter. It is essential that the police, prosecutors and victims advocacy groups have the necessary tools to combat human trafficking.

As far as the provisions on procuring are concerned, I was very shocked. I did not at all expect the government to propose amendments to the procuring provisions. On the contrary, I expected the consecutive sentences for pimps, and the forfeiture of the proceeds of crime of pimps, to be provisions that the government would support.

In committee, the government said it wanted to wait for the Supreme Court ruling in the Bedford case.

We know that 80% to 90% of people who are victims of human trafficking are trafficked into prostitution, especially in Canada.

Criminal CodePrivate Members' Business

June 18th, 2013 / 6 p.m.
See context

Bloc

Maria Mourani Bloc Ahuntsic, QC

moved that Bill C-452, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (exploitation and trafficking in persons), as amended, be concurred in at report stage.

The House proceeded to the consideration of Bill C-452, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (exploitation and trafficking in persons), as reported (with amendments) from the committee.

Human Trafficking and Sexual ExploitationPetitionsRoutine Proceedings

May 10th, 2013 / 12:15 p.m.
See context

NDP

Françoise Boivin NDP Gatineau, QC

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to table two petitions. The first one will go to the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights. It is about Bill C-452, which amends the Criminal Code as it relates to human trafficking and exploitation.

According to 2007 figures released by the UN, the annual proceeds from criminal activities involving human trafficking are estimated at $32 billion. That is why many people have signed the petition to support Bill C-452.

Justice and Human RightsCommittees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings

May 9th, 2013 / 10:05 a.m.
See context

Conservative

Mike Wallace Conservative Burlington, ON

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the 24th report of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights in relation to Bill C-452, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (exploitation and trafficking in persons).

The committee has studied the bill and has decided to report the bill back to the House with amendments.

May 8th, 2013 / 4:20 p.m.
See context

NDP

Françoise Boivin NDP Gatineau, QC

This is a problem for me because, during the study of Bill C-452, we all agreed in saying that the offences in question were serious. I have seen government bills take up to a year or a year and a half to be passed. The argument related to provinces is not the problem here; this is a classic case of procrastination.

Sometimes, deciding when a piece of legislation should be implemented has to do with politics. This is absolutely not a problem for the provinces, which know very well what we look at when we study bills related to criminal law. Quebec's minister of justice is fully up to speed, and that is the case for all other bills. The same goes for all other provincial ministers of justice.

I understand the Supreme Court's argument. I absolutely don't want to have any problems—for instance, a case where one of the two parties appearing before the Supreme Court may use what we are doing to argue that this is a message from the government.

That being said, the message was clear. This piece of legislation will come into force 30 days after it receives royal assent. We know exactly when that will be. In short, either we are serious or we are not.

May 8th, 2013 / 4:15 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Judy Sgro Liberal York West, ON

Thank you very much.

Thank you for your indulgences. I'm filling in for Professor Cotler on an issue that I think is really important to all of our people, especially when, particularly, you say that.

The concerns that we have regarding the amendment are that it apparently changes what's caught by the “proceeds of crime” provision. The current wording in Bill C-452 adds “procuring or trafficking in persons”.

As much as we support the government's amendment, to the extent that it removes the phrase “procurement”, it certainly is a procurement offence in section 212 of the Criminal Code, which is before the Supreme Court—we all know that. We do not want to prejudice any of the parties or the court, in the determination of the case. Indeed, of particular concern is that the procurement offence contains the “living off of the avails” provision, to which applying proceeds of crime might prove problematic and undesirable, in relation to prostitutes who take measures for their safety and protection.

The concern we have with the rest of the government's proposed change is that specifying human trafficking offences, instead of using the phrase “trafficking in persons” might be far too narrow in the event, for example, if someone is charged with numerous offences related to trafficking, but perhaps the trafficking charge itself does not hold.

We certainly understand that from a legislative drafting perspective, clarity in the code is desirable, and we would not want to have extended discussions of what is, and is not, trafficking, relative to the proceeds of crime upon sentencing. With that said, we do have concerns that someone who has engaged in or assisted in human trafficking, but is not charged with that specific offence, would not be subject to the proceeds of crime provision.

May 8th, 2013 / 4:10 p.m.
See context

NDP

Françoise Boivin NDP Gatineau, QC

Here's how I see things. When I mentioned the decision in the Bedford case, I simply wanted to argue that our whole debate on section 1 may have been pointless, since we don't know what position the Supreme Court will adopt. The amendment proposed in Bill C-452 does not affect the correction the trial judge asked parliamentarians to make. It was not related to types of sentences, but to the offence itself. I think that's more or less applicable.

However, I am always somewhat reluctant to amend a provision that has already been submitted to the courts. We may want to err on the side of caution and wait for the Supreme Court's ruling. I have no problem with that approach. However, I fully support the proposed amendment to section 212 of the Criminal Code concerning sentence types, provided that it is considered constitutional.

It's simply a matter of delaying the process. Mr. Seeback is right. If the Supreme Court concludes that those provisions are entirely constitutional, the issue will come before us again and we will have to consider it once more. Perhaps someone else could propose an amendment. Even the government could do that, since it really seemed to support this bill.

May 8th, 2013 / 4:10 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Robert Goguen Conservative Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB

I have a motion, Mr. Speaker. It has been discussed with Madam Boivin, I believe, and the Liberal Party, perhaps not Mrs. Sgro.

We voted previously on clause 1. I seek unanimous consent to reopen the discussion on clause 1. Actually, Madam Boivin picked up on this during earlier discussions, and it has to do with the Bedford case, which is before the Supreme Court of Canada.

You'll recall that we voted in favour of clause 1. This bill would impose a mandatory consecutive sentence in cases where a person has been convicted under section 212 of the Criminal Code, the procuring provision, and any other offence arising out of the same events or series of events. You'll also recall that we addressed clause 1 in the context of Liberal amendment 1, but we did not discuss the substance of the clause.

As I say, there's the issue of the Bedford case before the Supreme Court of Canada. I know you're aware of this, and it's expected to be heard by the Supreme Court of Canada in June. The court will be considering the constitutionality of several of the Criminal Code's provisions regarding prostitution, including one of the procuring provisions, the procuring offence under paragraph 212(1)(j), living off the avails of prostitution, which this squarely deals with in clause 1.

In my view, this committee should carefully consider this matter and seek further input from the Department of Justice on the matter. For this reason, I would move a unanimous consent to reopen the discussion on clause 1 of Bill C-452 for further consideration by the committee. It may be appropriate to consult the expert here on this, Mr. Chair, if we do get the unanimous consent.

Trafficking in Persons and Sexual ExploitationPetitionsRoutine Proceedings

May 7th, 2013 / 10:10 a.m.
See context

NDP

Françoise Boivin NDP Gatineau, QC

Mr. Speaker, the second petition is in support of Bill C-452, which seeks to combat trafficking in persons and sexual exploitation.

May 6th, 2013 / 5:35 p.m.
See context

Counsel, Criminal Law Policy Section, Department of Justice

Nathalie Levman

I can explain the amendment. It does create a separate legal test for exploitation, so the police would have to decide which definition they would go with. Previous witnesses have correctly pointed out that much of this language is derived from article 3 of the United Nations trafficking protocol and, as has already been pointed out, that language has not been judicially interpreted in Canada so there really is a problem with vagueness and potential overbreadth here with some of this language. It could confuse the operation of the law, and it raises potential charter considerations.

On the point of the words “labour services”, the current provision in section 279.04 is intended, of course, to cover all types of labour or services including sexual services. Bill C-452 does refer to sexual services in the separate legal test it provides and, of course, that relates back to the prostitution provisions, which also refer to sexual services.

This is a term that has meaning in our law, is intelligible, and has been judicially interpreted.

May 6th, 2013 / 5:20 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Sean Casey Liberal Charlottetown, PE

Yes, please.

Mr. Chair, you have Bill C-452 before you. I referred to this in my intervention with respect to amendment G-2. Essentially, this adds in the provisions with respect to living off the avails of human trafficking or exploitation, so it deals with the example I referred to in amendment G-2, the example of the two brothers, where one would have the availability of the presumption. One would be forced to deal with the rebuttable presumption, but the financier wouldn't. This would catch him.

I do share the concern of the sponsor of the bill and the witnesses over low prosecution rates for trafficking offences and agree that the presumption provisions may be beneficial. Such provisions, while not unprecedented in the Criminal Code, are limited in number, and rightly so, given the presumption of innocence. The committee has heard testimony that this reversal would help convict offenders when the victims of exploitation are too frightened to testify. This is a worthy goal, and I'm not seeking to do away with the reversal of the burden of proof.

I am, however, seeking to ensure that this extraordinary measure will not unintentionally lead to the conviction of a person who is not guilty. The current wording of the bill applies this provision to anyone who is “habitually in the company of” an exploited person, which is overly broad. The amendment would require someone to be living off the avails of the exploitation in order for the reversal of burden to apply.

Given the importance of these reverse onus provisions to the presumption of innocence, I think it's extremely important that we get it right. On the suggestion that the example may be off the wall, I don't think the example of the two brothers is. I heard Mr. Calkins referring to the availability of the aiding and abetting provisions within the Criminal Code, which would provide some assistance with respect to the actual offence, but in terms of the rebuttable presumption that we're now building in, it wouldn't.

I would ask that this be considered. Thank you.

May 6th, 2013 / 5:20 p.m.
See context

Counsel, Criminal Law Policy Section, Department of Justice

Nathalie Levman

I believe so. I believe this accomplishes the same goal as is in Bill C-452, but it better reflects the type of language that's already used in the Criminal Code and that has been found to be constitutional, so it's safer. But it affects the same thing.

May 6th, 2013 / 5:15 p.m.
See context

NDP

Françoise Boivin NDP Gatineau, QC

I just want to make sure my understanding of the burden of proof is correct as far as what the police, or rather the Crown, have to prove. It is, after all, the crown attorney who has to establish the proof. This doesn't make things harder for them than the original bill did. Unless I'm mistaken, we're repeating the language in sections 279.01 and 279.011 of the Criminal Code. We're doing somewhat the same thing when it comes to section 212 and the language regarding the presumption and evidence that the person lives with or is habitually in the company of a prostitute. So we're always repeating the language of the offence itself. That seems to make things clearer than they were originally in Bill C-452. That's what you're telling us, basically.

Using that language has absolutely no bearing on the strength of the burden of proof for the Crown. That's what the bill is trying to do, in other words, provide more tools to eradicate a scourge. That should be our focus. Indeed, if we want to send a crystal clear message that we have zero tolerance for human trafficking and we want to give police more tools, the language in question is perfectly fine.

Is my understanding correct? If so, then, I'm okay with it.

May 6th, 2013 / 5:10 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Sean Casey Liberal Charlottetown, PE

I have some submissions with respect to it. I'm satisfied with the answer to the question, but I have some concerns about the amendment. Bear with me, Mr. Chairman. In my submissions there are a couple of hypotheticals, so it's a bit lengthy and it's been prepared in advance.

This amendment replaces the key provision providing the presumption that one who lives with a person being exploited is deemed to have exploited or facilitated for the purposes of trafficking in persons.

The committee will know that we have also submitted an amendment to this section that may or may not be brought up or debated. It specifically references “living off the avails”, which we believe is an important element that should be incorporated. My concerns with respect to the proposed amendment G-2 will necessarily reference the fact that we feel “living off the avails” should be there.

The first general concern is that the presumption here applies to a person who is not exploited, but who “lives with or is habitually in the company of a person who is exploited”. This raises the issue of minors whose parents may be human traffickers or who are unaware of what is occurring. It would also apply, for example, to teachers who may not know that a child in their classroom is the victim of exploitation, as teachers would arguably meet the definition of “habitually being in the company of”.

Certainly, we want to facilitate the prosecution of traffickers, but not at the risk of casting too wide a net. As such, I hope that if amendment G-2 passes, Liberal 3 will be given strong consideration to exempt minors from the operation of this provision. If that language is not acceptable to the government, I hope that it will propose a subamendment to G-2 to address this problem.

My second concern relates to the specifics of the presumption at issue. In Bill C-452, the proposed presumption deems someone living or habitually in the company of an exploited person as exploiting them or facilitating their exploitation. Amendment G-2 stipulates that evidence that someone is in this situation is proof that the person exercises control, direction, or influence over the movements of the exploited person. I believe this presumption is problematic and counterproductive to our shared goal of enhancing the prosecution of human traffickers.

In the presumption in Bill C-452, what is rebuttable is whether or not someone has exploited or facilitated exploitation. This is a different presumption to counter and one that goes to the heart of the matter, namely, exploitation. The wording in this amendment seems to suggest that we are concerned about who exercised control, direction, or influence over the movements of the exploited person or persons.

Let's imagine a scenario where two brothers live together and run a trafficking ring from their house. While one brother who interacts with the exploited individuals would surely be caught by this presumption, the sibling who does only the financing and who has no real interaction with those being exploited may raise arguments that his actions do not control or influence the movements of the persons. He may not be caught by this presumption, whereas the mere fact of his shared residence would be sufficient for a presumption of his involvement under both the bill unamended and under the bill with the Liberal amendment.

While that example illustrates the narrowness of the presumption after amendment under G-2, in some cases it may also be over-broad. For example, women working together as sex workers may not know the extent to which one may be controlled by her pimp, financially or otherwise. But a broad reading of this presumption would operate to target all of the sex workers in habitual contact with her as facilitating her exploitation. I don't believe that's our intention.

We're all aware that a similar presumption, relative to prostitution-related cases, is under review by the Supreme Court in the Bedford case. I don't wish to prejudice their analysis in any way, but I believe that this presumption may operate in a wholly undesirable, if not unconstitutional, way.

Thanks for your patience, Mr. Chairman.

May 6th, 2013 / 5:05 p.m.
See context

NDP

Françoise Boivin NDP Gatineau, QC

I don't know whether it's due to the fact that I'm not feeling well and my head is a bit foggy, but I'm having a hard time with the numbering for this clause.

If we adopt amendment G-1, basically, we will be deleting subclause 2(1) of the bill. That would mean that clause 2 would no longer contain subclause (1). I'm not sure that the numbering is right, but I might be the confused one. The amendment reads as follows:

That Bill C-452, in clause 2, be amended by replacing lines 1 to 7 on page 2 with the following: “(3) [...]

But it's no longer subclause (3). I assume it should be subclause (2).

May 6th, 2013 / 4:55 p.m.
See context

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Mike Wallace

Thank you, Mr. Casey. I will rule on that amendment.

Bill C-452 amends the Criminal Code to provide for consecutive sentences for offences related to procuring and trafficking in persons. This amendment proposes to include a provision whereby the sentences for those offences could be served concurrently.

As House of Commons Procedure and Practice, second edition, states on page 766, “An amendment to a bill that was referred to committee after second reading is out of order if it is beyond the scope and principle of the bill.”

In the opinion of the chair, the inclusion of a provision that could permit sentences for these offences to be served concurrently would be contrary to the key element of the bill and therefore is inadmissible. As amendment Liberal-4 is consequential to this amendment and contains the same provision, it is also inadmissible.

I'm ruling that it is out of order. Are there any questions or comments on that?

Seeing none, we will move on. Shall clause 1 carry?

(Clause 1 agreed to)

(On clause 2)

Clause 2 has amendments.

On government amendment G-1, we have Monsieur Goguen.

May 6th, 2013 / 4:55 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Sean Casey Liberal Charlottetown, PE

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

You have amendment Liberal-1 before you. Bill C-452 requires judges to issue consecutive sentences for offences under section 212 of the Criminal Code. This amendment would allow for exceptions if the judge deems consecutive sentences to be not in the best interests of justice, and would require a written explanation from a judge in such cases.

I wasn't here for the testimony, but I understand that you've heard compelling testimony that concurrent sentences for exploitation are presently the norm, and that this norm has to be reversed in order to create a disincentive for those committing exploitation to expand their operations. I believe that this can be done without compromising the proper role of the judiciary or charter guarantees such as those against cruel and unusual punishment.

As such, this amendment would preserve the bill's instruction to judges that sentences under section 212 of the code are to be served consecutively, while allowing for concurrent sentences in exceptional circumstances, thus retaining judicial discretion. Further, it would require judges to explain in writing their decision to provide concurrent sentences in such cases.

May 6th, 2013 / 4:50 p.m.
See context

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Mike Wallace

I call this meeting back to order.

I would also invite Madame Mourani to the table, if she'd like to come. It's a private member's bill, her bill, and I think that's only appropriate if she'd like to be here to take part in the discussion. As chair I think I'll honour that, as it's a private member's bill.

Ladies and gentlemen, I think we have nine amendments to the six-clause bill. We have set aside until 5:15, but we can go longer if needed, obviously, as we need to do this.

So we are doing clause by clause of Bill C-452. Put up your hand and we'll take notes and we'll recognize you. And if you want to ask the staff from the department a question, they'd be happy to do that—I'm not sure Nathalie's happy to answer, but she's here for that—or to deal with anything about the ruling. That's why I'm surrounded by clerks, because they don't think I know what I'm doing.

May 6th, 2013 / 4 p.m.
See context

NDP

Françoise Boivin NDP Gatineau, QC

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

My thanks to our six witnesses for appearing before the committee today.

My questions are for you, Ms. Miville-Dechêne.

First of all, I would like to congratulate you for your document “Prostitution: Time to Take Action”. Anyone who is interested in the subject would do well to read it. In a way, we have no choice. Whether because of Ms. Mourani's bill or because of the decision in the Bedford case, which is going to be upon us soon, we are going to have to deal with it at some stage.

I would really like Bill C-452 to change things but I am not sure that that will be the case in practical terms. I do not think that victims are going to stop being afraid to come forward and that crown prosecutors and defence lawyers are going to stop reaching deals. Even if the intent is for harsher penalties, there is nothing to say that things will work that way.

I am not an expert in this area. After all your work in this area, you are probably a bigger expert than I am. When I read sections 212 and 279 of the Criminal Code, the sections that deal with procuring and human trafficking, I have a little difficulty seeing what makes them different from each other. Perhaps one of you can explain it to me. I find that they look pretty much the same.

In the Bedford case, the Court of Appeal had made its ruling. The Supreme Court is going to render its decision this summer, I think, although it may take another six or seven months, if not more. At that point, all this great work could end up in the recycling and we would be back at square one.

What do you think?

May 6th, 2013 / 3:50 p.m.
See context

Louise Dionne Coordinator, Comité d'action contre la traite humaine interne et international

We believe that Bill C-452, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (exploitation and trafficking in persons), introduced by Maria Mourani, will help to counter procuring and human trafficking in Canada. This bill provides solutions to the limits of the justice system while responding to some of our concerns about the needs of victims. It also will also go some way to providing the social and economic measures necessary to support those who have been exploited.

In our opinion, trafficking for the purposes of sexual exploitation and forced labour is a troubling phenomenon that affects Canada both internationally and nationally. In that context, we support the addition of the domestic dimension of the problem, which is often forgotten. Certainly, Canada is a destination and a transit country for victims of trafficking from other countries, but there are also human trafficking situations between Canadian provinces and between rural and urban areas. That is particularly true in the trafficking of aboriginal women.

Nevertheless, we would like to express some concerns. The bill seeks to provide a deterrent to the crime of human trafficking. We are in favour of the desire to deter the traffickers. But our fear is that this may adversely affect some victims, because the provisions may well not take into account a criminal’s degree of responsibility. Human trafficking is a complex problem, as is the path of the victims. Sometimes, victims become traffickers themselves in order to avoid exploitation or to make it stop. The desire to put such a deterrent in place leads to a real risk of penalizing some victims. How do we make sure that victims do not become targets of the bill?

We are in favour of the principle of the culpability of those who harbour trafficking victims or who are found with them. That presumption of guilt will make the role of police and prosecutors easier, no doubt. But it seems to us that this section should be applied prudently. In fact, we feel that it must not be applied at the cost of those in vulnerable situations who may simply be living with those being exploited. Access to justice in this country is not equal for all. Unfortunately, it is often the case that the most vulnerable are the most affected. This includes victims of trafficking. They may not be in a position to be able to prove their innocence because they do not have the means to do so.

The bill proposes a definition of sexual exploitation that draws its inspiration in large part from article 3 of the Palermo Protocol. The definition makes it possible to identify two distinct aspects of human trafficking: forced labour and sexual exploitation. Trafficking for the purposes of prostitution is the more widespread in Canada, and this article allows us to clearly include sexual services in the broader context of trafficking for the purposes of sexual exploitation. This addition must not allow us to forget the importance of the fight against forced labour, of which a victim of sexual exploitation may well be a victim as well. Recent international reports attest to a significant increase in this neglected reality of human trafficking.

The inclusion of procuring and human trafficking in the list of crimes that can lead to the confiscation of assets provides a way for exploited persons to be supported. This also corresponds to the recommendations made by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime about the use of the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime, as the first paragraph of article 12 of the Convention states.

However, we must not lose sight of the second paragraph of article 14 of the same convention that suggests that signatories “give priority consideration to returning the confiscated proceeds of crime or property to the requesting State Party so that it can give compensation to the victims of the crime”.

We have one final concern. Once more, it asks that attention be paid to the path taken by the accused, who are generally women, and to the circumstances that led them to become involved in trafficking.

In 2012, the federal government announced the National Action Plan to Combat Human Trafficking. It brought together all Canadian initiatives that were part of the fight against human trafficking. Among its strong points was the consolidation and bringing together of government action into the same department: Public Safety Canada. It also had the merit of focusing on the traffickers’ main targets, women and children. Those affected by human trafficking are generally the most vulnerable: migrant workers, undocumented immigrants, youth in distress, and aboriginal women and girls.

Although prosecuting criminals is an important element of the fight against human trafficking, Canada has done little following its international commitment to victim protection. Among the effective measures established for the protection of victims, one is to focus on a global and coordinated approach on several fronts: prevention, gathering reliable information, intersectoral coordination, victim identification and supporting community initiatives.

In protecting victims and protecting victims' rights, we recommend that Canada be more proactive in addressing the causes of human trafficking, poverty, discrimination, racism, and supply and demand. Among the paths to a solution that will counter trafficking for sexual exploitation, the Swedish approach is often held up as a model because it attacks the demand by penalizing those who purchase sexual services. Penalizing the johns goes hand in hand with public advertising campaigns aimed at men, awareness programs aimed both at youth and at those who are the normal targets of criminals, and assistance programs aimed at women who wish to get out of prostitution.

Part of our approach should be to assist women to get out of violent situations, such as prostitution and to provide them with various services: shelters, legal and social advice, education, and professional training.

We should also mention that one of the concerns about human trafficking often overlook one major element. That is forced labour. We remind you that Canada should ratify the international conventions on migrant workers and review the temporary foreign worker programs, particularly those that target so-called unskilled workers.

Thank you.

May 6th, 2013 / 3:45 p.m.
See context

Claudette Bastien President, Comité d'action contre la traite humaine interne et international

Thank you very much.

I will do the first part of the presentation describing CATHII, and Ms. Dionne will do the second part.

I would like to thank the members of the committee for giving us an opportunity to testify.

The Comité d'action contre la traite humaine interne et internationale, or CATHII, has worked since 2004 to address the issue of human trafficking, whether for the purposes of sexual exploitation or forced labour. Since its inception by religious communities in Quebec, CATHII has become a major player in the fight against exploitation and the violation of fundamental rights.

CATHII's members are involved in three types of activities: research on the reality of trafficking and on Canadian and international laws on trafficking; training with a view to action; and, finally, giving priority to providing shelter and support to victims of human trafficking.

CATHII also wanted to contribute to an understanding of the issue. One of its activities was the release of a research study carried out in partnership with anthropologist Aurélie Lebrun in order to better understand prostitution from the standpoint of its clients. The organization also published a reflection paper entitled “Acting Against Human Trafficking”.

In 2006, CATHII organized a one-day conference. That meeting brought together the main community, government, police and academic players to define the needs of victims. A number of organizations pointed out that there were not enough services for human trafficking victims, an observation reiterated at the consultation meeting with the members of the Sous-comité interministériel sur la traite des femmes migrantes du Québec, which we organized in 2007. Another meeting in April confirmed the need to take concerted action, making sure that victims are the focus of concerns and initiatives.

Recently, CATHII started a Quebec coalition against human trafficking with over 25 organizations working for human trafficking victims.

Human trafficking, especially of women and children, is a violation of fundamental human rights. It has become an increasing issue in Canada and around the world. Canada is a source country, a transit country and a destination country all at once.

In 2005, Canada amended the Criminal Code to include human trafficking. Since then, it has added minimum sentences for traffickers of minor children, followed by human trafficking in the form of offences committed abroad for which Canadian citizens and permanent residents can be prosecuted in Canada. So the Criminal Code has been amended to specify some of the factors that courts can take into consideration when determining what exploitation means.

Bill C-452 is one of the measures intended to provide tools to legal and judicial stakeholders who are fighting against human trafficking.

May 6th, 2013 / 3:40 p.m.
See context

Michael Maidment Area Director, Public Relations and Development, Federal Government Liaison Officer, Salvation Army

Thank you, Mr. Chair and committee members. My name is Michael Maidment. I'm the federal government liaison officer for the Salvation Army in Canada.

I'd first like to thank you for the opportunity to present to you this afternoon on the issue of human trafficking and, more specifically, on Bill C-452.

I'd like to begin by commending Madame Mourani for her work in this important legislation and for her commitment in presenting complex solutions to the issue of human trafficking in this country. I am delighted today to be joined by Naomi Krueger. Naomi is the manager of one of Canada's first shelters dedicated exclusively to caring for the victims of human trafficking. Deborah's Gate, which opened in 2009, aims to provide confidential, professional, and culturally sensitive community-support networks for survivors of this terrible crime.

The case management team at Deborah's Gate coordinates appointments with law-enforcement officials, immigration officials, legal counsel, trauma counsellors, and other service providers. Additional programs provide residents of the shelter with access to income assistance and/or sustainable income, addiction-treatment programs, health and dental care, and community-integration programs.

I want to frame my comments this afternoon by saying that the Salvation Army appears before you today in our capacity as Canada's largest social-service provider and with our 130 years of service-delivery experience, which includes, of course, programs such as Deborah's Gate. I hope to convey the perspective of our organization, as the leading social-service provider, on this legislation.

First off, I want to say that the Salvation Army wholly supports legislation that strengthens the ability of the criminal justice system to respond to the crime of human trafficking. Just as we supported Bill C-268 and Bill C-310, we, too, support Bill C-452. We believe the bill will provide law-enforcement officials with more tools to prosecute those who commit this heinous crime and that it is essential to preventing future victims.

With specific reference to the proposed amendments in the bill, we believe that allowing consecutive sentencing for offences is positive in two ways. First, a significant sentence is important to victims of human trafficking in so far as it provides a period of safety during which a victim doesn't need to worry about their trafficker being at large. This period is critical to a victim's ability to access restorative resources and engage in a long-term healing process.

The effects of violence and exploitation on a victim do not disappear when the trafficker is arrested. Instead, fear, anxiety, and hopelessness often increase, at least until the victim knows the trafficker will be held in custody for a designated period of time.

Second, we think this proposed amendment would strengthen the deterrent for perpetrators of human trafficking who believe the financial gain of the exploitation outweighs the loss experienced during shorter prison sentences. One such victim and resident of our shelter estimated that her trafficker earned $620,000 over a two-year period through her sexual exploitation.

I would like to raise one area of consideration regarding this amendment, that we're seeing more and more situations where victims who were once trafficked themselves have turned to aiding their traffickers with procuring and grooming other victims. This is generally a strategy that victims of human trafficking use to improve their own circumstances in an attempt to escape the exploitation they have undergone. Providing the courts with flexibility in the application of consecutive sentencing may prevent victims of human trafficking from being punished by the criminal justice system for attempting to escape from their exploitation.

With reference to adding the term “domestic” to the charge of human trafficking within the Criminal Code, the Salvation Army feels that this proposed amendment provides important clarity to the code. Human trafficking is a domestic issue. We've already heard that this afternoon. Yet the myth that trafficking is exclusively an international issue persists among many Canadians. Accurately describing human trafficking as a domestic issue will aid in correcting this long-term myth.

Deborah's Gate opened in 2009. Over half its residents have been victims of domestic trafficking, Canadian residents trafficked within Canadian cities, most often for sexual exploitation by Canadian men. Furthermore, our organization has found that women in our shelter systems were targeted as children as young as 12 years old, many from reserves in northern B.C., Alberta, and Manitoba, both by traffickers with gang affiliation and by individuals working alone.

The change this bill offers—the reversal of the burden of proof for the charge of human trafficking—is an important recognition of the devastating impact that sexual exploitation has on its victims. This reversal will not only make it easier to prosecute traffickers but will also protect victims who are struggling with the effects of being exploited.

With reference to extending the human trafficking charges to those who harbour a person who has been exploited, the Salvation Army is pleased that this proposed legislation considers the reality that many different individuals can play a role in the crime of human trafficking without ever meeting the conditions set forth by the legal definition.

While many individuals can share responsibility for holding a victim captive, it is rare that all parties involved are prosecuted. In our experience, traffickers are aided by multiple associates, each of which plays a role in facilitating their exploitation. While none of the associates may profit directly from a victim's exploitation, they supervise the victim's sexual services, assault victims when they fail to comply with their traffickers' orders, and coordinate travel from one abuser to another.

The proposed amendment would better equip law-enforcement officers to respond to the severity and complexity of trafficking operations holding all those involved accountable for the crime in its entirety.

It should be noted, though, that while this amendment in general enables effective enforcement of the offence, unintended consequences of the wording and the absence of evidence to the contrary may arise.

In particular, information that victims communicate to the police, health care practitioners, and other front-line service providers while they are in a state of fear or as a means to survival could be used as evidence to contradict exploitation or facilitation of exploitation at a later date. Victims have repeatedly reported that they were at times coached on what to say when questioned by authority figures.

Many times this coaching has led to the gathering of contradictory statements that could be used as evidence to the contrary if needed. A provision preventing the use of statements made by victims while in a state of trauma or coercion might help to avoid this unintended consequence.

In conclusion, while it is important to strengthen the tools available to prosecute those who commit the terrible crime of human trafficking, it is equally important, if not more so, to consider strengthening our ability to prevent human trafficking from occurring in the first place.

Thank you again for the opportunity to address you this afternoon and for your commitment to eradicating human trafficking in Canada.

May 6th, 2013 / 3:30 p.m.
See context

Julie Miville-Dechêne President, Quebec Council on the Status of Women

Thank you for having me.

I will deliver my presentation in French.

The Quebec Council on the Status of Women is an advisory and review body that has sought to promote and defend the rights and interests of Quebec women since 1973.

As such, we have developed an expertise on prostitution and human trafficking. Last June, we published an in-depth research study in which I took part. I have it here with me. If you are interested, it is available. It is an opinion urging authorities to take action and help human trafficking victims and prostitutes leave the unhealthy environment in which they are exploited.

From a legal standpoint, we maintain that the Criminal Code must apply to pimps and johns because demand for sexual services encourages trafficking and prostitution. However, we believe that it is time to stop criminalizing prostitutes, victims of trafficking and non-victims, because in most cases, they sell their bodies after having suffered all sorts of abuses in their childhood. We will come back to that.

Given our bias for women, and specifically for exploited and vulnerable women, the council has been publicly supporting Maria Mourani's Bill C-452 since October. We feel that society must have powerful disincentives to try and put a stop to human trafficking. We think human trafficking is a serious crime that affects many parts of the world, as well as young Canadian girls who may be our neighbours or even members of our own families.

The changes set out in Bill C-452 ensure that police officers are better equipped. Other witnesses, like Detective Sergeant Monchamp, presented those arguments to you. In terms of principles, the bill also sends a clear message to those who might be tempted by this seemingly easy way to make money at the expense of naïve and renewable prey, since those people are a renewable resource as far as the pimps are concerned. The message is that crimes of exploitation and human trafficking will be fought and punished in Canada to the full extent of the law. Since these crimes represent a grave violation of fundamental human rights, the changes proposed by the bill would show to the whole world that Canada’s criminal system is exemplary in combatting trafficking.

The proposed changes include consecutive sentences for procuring and human trafficking offences. The council supports this tougher punishment, because a number of violent crimes are also often committed in trafficking cases. Let me give you one example from Montreal. Marie—that is not her real name—was a dancer in strip clubs for six years. She told me that she was in the clutches of a violent pimp. Not only was she locked in her home, beaten and raped by her pimp who would take all her earnings from lap dancing, but this same pimp took out his anger on her by burning her hand with his cigar butt and strangling her cat before her eyes. The cat was the only comfort she had left. This level of mental cruelty and control is difficult to imagine in a free country, but it does exist. This young, fragile woman was duped when she was 17 by a violent man who promised to take care of her. She did not dare report him because she was afraid her family would pay the price since he threatened to go after her mother or sister if the victim did not obey him. She only co-operated with the police once her pimp was arrested.

Bill C-452 is a major change in our way of doing things, but we don’t believe that the clause on consecutive sentences ties judges’ hands and prevents them from assessing cases individually. The bill provides new benchmarks, but nothing prevents judges from exercising their discretion in applying the principle of proportionality and imposing a sentence that is deemed fair for the accused, based on the circumstances.

Another notable change in the bill is the reverse onus. You talked about it here. The accused will have to prove that they do not make a living by exploiting someone else when a trafficking victim is present. This measure is another way to make prosecutors’ work easier, given that traumatized victims are often afraid to testify against their aggressors or are actually suffering from the Stockholm Syndrome.

As part of our research, we talked to a number of people involved, police officers and lawyers who explained that prosecutors were often happy to use the section against procuring, and not against trafficking, because it was harder to get evidence against trafficking. Yet, in most cases, trafficking is involved. By reversing the onus, the burden is partly placed on the accused. Given the long police surveillance operations that lead to arrests, we think it is appropriate to require the accused to prove, through financial records or otherwise, that they have their own sources of revenue. Let us not forget that, by definition, revenues from prostitution are not declared and are done in cash. So that complicates the work of the authorities a fair bit.

Finally, the bill states that proceeds of crime can be confiscated in procuring and trafficking offences. That's great. We think it is only fair that those found guilty can no longer enjoy the proceeds of their crimes.

Here are some numbers. In 2012, 56 trafficking cases went to court, involving about 85 accused and 136 victims. Of course, that does not seem like a lot, but that is only the tip of the iceberg, because it is difficult to measure the scope of illegal activities. My colleague Ms. Dionne will give you a bit more information about this later.

We often think that trafficking only happens to women from poorer countries who end up in our strip clubs. That is not true. Domestic trafficking, meaning trafficking between places and provinces within Canada, represents 90% of all cases that end up in court. People in the know told me about victims of domestic trafficking at the Centre jeunesse de la Montérégie in Longueuil. The way they operate is well-known and widespread. Young men belonging to street gangs hang around subway stations in Longueuil and even around schools. Young girls are seduced by gang members who, at first, vow to love and protect them and smother them with attention. Then the climate changes. The guys need money and ask the young girls to help them; they desensitize them with gangbangs, which are group rapes, before forcing them to become strippers and prostitutes.

We are talking about trafficking because those girls are dragged from apartment to apartment and lose their means of escape, because they may be beaten or drugged. Some girls from Quebec end up in Ontario. I am sure you have heard about this problem in the clubs close to the border, particularly in Windsor. Yes, those young girls are often runaways and come from dysfunctional families, but the pimps take advantage of them. In fact, they are not always runaways, because seduction is a weapon that can be used against teenage girls who may simply want to cut loose.

I will briefly take this opportunity to tell you about one of my concerns. It is important that the issue of trafficking does not overshadow the issue of prostitution. The two issues are closely connected, because, according to the Fondation Scelles, most prostitutes worldwide fall prey to human trafficking rings. I am very aware that it is easier to have a social consensus on an issue such as trafficking because the topic itself takes us back to slavery and the lack of consent. However, across Canada, we also have prostitution without trafficking, which is a more complex issue, less cut and dry, and no doubt more widespread, in terms of the number of victims. So we should not forget about this issue. Prostitution is not always linked to trafficking, whereas human trafficking for the purposes of sexual exploitation always leads to prostitution.

Let me explain. Some prostitutes who do not have a pimp are increasingly selling their services on the Internet. They tell their stories in the media and talk boldly about their life choices. In short, those are not trafficking cases. But does that mean that those voices that claim that women can choose to become prostitutes represent the majority of women who sell their bodies to survive? No, absolutely not. It may be comforting to think so, but it is wrong to believe that this freedom of choice is the norm. Even according to the lawyers representing those who call themselves sex trade workers and who have gone to Ontario courts, only 5% to 20% of prostitutes can make a profit from this lucrative business and do in fact make an informed choice.

The others, the vast silent majority, find themselves being exploited in violent situations that they did not choose and from which they cannot easily escape without outside help. They are vulnerable women who, in 70% to 84% of cases, have experienced abuse in their youth and have drifted into prostitution, often getting into drugs as a way to endure this type of exploitation. I have met with some of those women.

That is why we are against the decriminalization of clients advocated by the sex trade worker lobby. In fact, that would only further trivialize and increase this trade that objectifies women. That is actually what happened in places like the Netherlands.

In addition to the issue you are examining today, I would like to share with you our broader perspective on the matter, since you are in a position to ask for changes to the Criminal Code. One single model around the world has proven successful in protecting women against this fundamental violation of their right to equality. In Sweden, only the pimps and johns are criminalized. The penalties and consequences are harsh. The prostitutes are not prosecuted. They are provided with significant social services so that they can leave that environment and find a job. The Swedish model has worked.

Ladies and gentlemen, I encourage you to think about those issues. Beyond this bill on trafficking, which is important, there is the whole issue of the women who are trapped in prostitution.

Thank you.

May 6th, 2013 / 3:30 p.m.
See context

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Mike Wallace

Ladies and gentlemen, I'm going to call the meeting to order. We are waiting for two more guests, but we'll get started.

I want to thank everyone for coming to the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights, meeting number 72. Pursuant to the order of reference of Wednesday, March 6, 2013, we are dealing with Bill C-452, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (exploitation and trafficking in persons).

We have three witnesses. As you see in the agenda, we have until 4:45 and then we will go to clause by clause from there. We'll see how far we can get with it. Hopefully we can finish this today.

Our first set of witnesses, the group that is here, is from the Quebec Council on the Status of Women. We have Julie Miville-Dechêne and Nathalie Bissonnette here.

Then from the Salvation Army we have Naomi Krueger and Michael Maidment.

We'll start with a presentation of about 10 minutes from the Quebec Council on the Status of Women.

Thank you for coming.

May 1st, 2013 / 4:55 p.m.
See context

NDP

Pierre Jacob NDP Brome—Missisquoi, QC

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thanks to our witnesses for being here.

I will confirm right off the bat that trafficking in persons is an odious crime and that we need to have political and legislative means to combat it. Bill C-452 is therefore a step in the right direction, but more must be done. In your opinion, what other measures could be taken to try to prevent trafficking in persons?

Who wants to start?

May 1st, 2013 / 4:45 p.m.
See context

Madeleine Bourget Vice-President, Association féminine d'éducation et d'action sociale (Afeas)

Good afternoon.

There is a close connection between prostitution and slavery. Slave women are the first ones exploited in brothels, followed by women from the poorer classes. According to the UN, more people are bought, sold and transported for sexual exploitation or other purposes today than during the 300 years of slavery. Slavery, although abolished 150 years ago, is still practised in our modern societies. There were 11.5 million victims of the African slave trade, whereas there have been 33 million victims of trafficking for prostitution in Southeast Asia alone.

Trafficking has been carried on differently in recent years, in recruitment, transportation and accommodation, in order to exploit women and children, who constitute the majority of its victims. There were nearly 5 million victims of sexual exploitation between 2002 and 2011. Annual profits generated by the exploitation of trafficking victims are estimated at more than $30 billion. In many places, trafficking governs the “economic health” of the sex industries, which includes pornography, prostitution, sexual tourism and, as mentioned earlier, erotic massage.

There are far more human victims of trafficking for prostitution purposes than there are of trafficking for domestic exploitation purposes or to provide cheap labour. Between 70% and 80% of prostitutes in Canada started working as prostitutes when they were children. There were an estimated 10,000 child prostitutes in Canada in 1997. The mortality rate of women and young girls involved in prostitution in Canada is 40 times higher than the national average. Women prostitutes represent 15% of suicides reported by American hospitals, and the figures are similar for France.

Prostitution is a form of violence in itself. The first act of violence is to subject prostitutes to the sexual pleasure of their customers. The second violent fact is that 90% of individuals become prostitutes as a result of sexual, physical and psychological violence. Kidnapping, rape, slaughter—there are slaughter camps in several European countries where human beings are sold—terror and murder are part of the process of “manufacturing the goods”. These are ways used to render prostituted individuals “functional”.

In the 10 years from 1990 to 2000, 77,500 young foreign women were the victims of traffickers. From 1999 to 2010, 200,000 young foreign women suffered the same treatment. It is often minors who are sold. They have tens and tens of contacts per day. Trafficking and prostitution have risen sharply over the past decade.

The procurers, or pimps, make an enormous amount of money at their victims' expense. They come in various forms: a spouse, someone who places newspaper ads or travel advertisements, a person who says he is your friend, but who is not, or someone in whom you have placed all your trust. Prostitution is not an occupation one chooses freely: it is a system of sexual exploitation. Prostituting oneself means losing one's personality, one's identity, but especially one's dignity.

Legalizing prostitution does not protect women any more than it does children. On the contrary, creating brothels makes them prisoners of the violence of their procurers and customers. Customers are convinced that they can do anything, that they have every right because they pay. In prostitution, the exchange of money does not reduce the level of violence and does not prove that the victims are consenting. On the contrary, it is proof of the rapists' premeditation and of the procurers' profit.

There are no customers, but rather male prostitution users who buy impunity from rape. There are no women, men or children leasing or selling sexual services: there are only victims of sexual violence who, at some point, are forced or compelled to be raped by strangers.

For many, prostitution is a necessary evil, an evil for the woman, but necessary for many men in satisfying their sexual needs. Some people even believe that prostitution can help prevent rape. The Conseil du statut de la femme believes that it is not the best way to calm men's sexual impulses.

Abolishing all forms of prostitution means attacking the rapists' impunity and starting to acknowledge that women and children are full-fledged human beings whose physical integrity may not be violated.

Abolishing the prostitution system is the only solution for living in a humane society. Prostitution has been regulated in the Netherlands since October 1, 2000. That legislation is simply a failure since only 4% of prostitutes are registered. This was supposed to put an end to the prostitution of minors. The Organization for Children's Rights estimates that the number of child prostitutes in the Netherlands rose from 4,000 in 1996 to 15,000 in 2001, including at least 5,000 of foreign origin.

As the Dutch, Greek and Austrian experience has shown, the number of legal prostitutes originally from those countries is gradually declining and the number of prostitutes who are clandestine, illegal or victims of trafficking is on the rise. Legalizing prostitution thus has not improved the lot of prostitutes.

The prostitution of children has risen significantly since legalization. The number of illegal brothels now exceeds the number of legal ones. The illegal industry is now out of control, and trafficking in women and children from other countries has risen sharply. The consequence of legalizing prostitution in certain regions of Australia has been clear growth in the industry.

In 1984, Afeas wanted all prostitution rings to be dismantled and called for severe penalties be imposed on individuals living from the avails of prostitution. At their most recent annual provincial conference last August, Afeas members adopted several positions on prostitution. For example, the association called for the passage of legislation prohibiting prostitution, the criminalization of prostitution customers, social policies to assist individuals wishing to leave the industry and sex education programs in the schools promoting healthy, equal sexuality.

Afeas, which represents 10,000 Quebec women, supports Bill C-452. That bill is entirely consistent with the positions the association adopted at its last conference. It was drafted based on numerous consultations, particularly with officers of the Montreal Police Service's morality section and sexual exploitation of children unit, the Barreau du Québec and women's and victims' rights advocacy groups.

Measures must be taken to facilitate the arrest of procurers and customers. Human trafficking generates more money than drugs. As Ms. Dufour said earlier, there are no resources to assist victims, to accommodate them or to help improve their situation.

Thank you.

May 1st, 2013 / 3:50 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Joy Smith Conservative Kildonan—St. Paul, MB

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Welcome, Mr. Hooper and Ms. Legault-Roy. Thank you for coming today.

Mr. Hooper, you and I know each other very well. Timea Nagy is an amazing victim who has risen above and is now helping police officers and is doing a lot of very good work. Mr. Hooper, as a lawyer for her organization, I have to thank you for all your volunteerism and for the work you have done as well.

Taking a look at this issue, you have described very well what we're looking at. It can be the girl next door. It can be people from abroad. I remember when Timea Nagy first came into Canada. She was trafficked from Hungary, as you know, and she was in a much different place from where she is right now, as one of the leaders in Canada, in my opinion, for helping victims of human trafficking.

In regard to the case you referred to in terms of the forced labour, I know between Timea, Toni Skarica, and a few of us, we did a lot of work on that one.

Looking at this whole bill from Maria Mourani, as you know, Bill C-268 and Bill C-310 did certain things to help with this issue of human trafficking. I would like you to talk a little bit more about how Bill C-452 will help the victims of human trafficking, because that is the issue here, where the victims go to court and they won't talk. I know for the men in the forced labour case it was a horrendous experience, and they actually had organized crime from Hungary after them as well, trying to come into Canada. In Bill C-310 we authorized the assumption of extraterritorial jurisdiction so that Canadian prosecution could happen if Canadian citizens or permanent residents who commit human trafficking went abroad. Then we had an interpretive provision, which expanded the definition of human trafficking to enable the courts to bring justice to these perpetrators. Bill C-452 will help the victims as well.

Mr. Hooper, I would like you to expand on your explanation of how this bill would apply to help these victims. Could you do that for us?

May 1st, 2013 / 3:35 p.m.
See context

Robert Hooper Chair, Walk With Me Canada Victim Services

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Walk With Me Canada was established by a survivor of human trafficking. Walk With Me was created with a commitment to ensuring that survivors have first response care and, secondly, with recognition that survivors should have a voice in developing a coordinated community response that can meet immediate crises and longer needs of trafficked victims.

Since its inception in 2009, Walk With Me has been working closely with various police services and has been able to provide unique services and support to many victims of human trafficking in Ontario and across this country.

Walk With Me Canada Victim Services' vision statement is transforming the lives of the victims of human trafficking while eradicating slavery in this country. The mission statement of Walk With Me Canada Victim Services is a survivor-led organization dedicated to raising awareness and providing education on issues of slavery, delivering and coordinating services, supporting victims to become survivors, and advocating action for change in our laws in this country.

In the last three years, Walk With Me has assisted over 200 men and women who have been rescued or left their position where they were trafficked for labour or, most often, for sex. Those we have helped thus far are both men and women, and their ages range from 14 to 45.

Several of these circumstances include multiple people being trafficked by the same person, which we think is very important in this bill. Often the word “stable” is used, and I apologize, but that's the word we often hear on the street. Some of the people, particularly in the sex industry, have a stable of young women, which makes the consecutive sentencing quite important to our organization.

Walk With Me operates a safe house and also provides first response assistance for trafficked persons. We are attempting to start and create second-stage housing for longer rehabilitation and reintegration into society for the people we help.

The bill itself, Bill C-452—the three amendments—is supported by Walk With Me Canada, with some modifications in the language, hopefully. It purports to make three amendments to the Criminal Code of Canada. They are to provide consecutive sentences for offences related to procuring and trafficking in persons; to create a presumption regarding the exploitation of one person by another and add circumstances that are deemed to constitute exploitation; and finally, the amendment is to add the offences of procuring and trafficking of persons to the list of offences where forfeiture of proceeds of crime would apply.

Walk With Me Canada supports all three amendments. Our support is subject to a review of the legislation for wording and overlap with some of the previous amendments made in Bill C-310.

On consecutive sentences for offences related to procuring and trafficking in persons, Walk With Me Canada's somewhat recent arrival on the scene does not allow us to have any scientific data for the committee with respect to concurrent sentences as opposed to consecutive sentences. A review of sentences with respect to trafficking in drugs and trafficking in persons shows that harsher sentences are handed out by our courts for drug trafficking than for trafficking in persons, either for sex or for labour. Not to make light of drug trafficking, but certainly the sentences are more harsh than they are for trafficking in persons.

Furthermore, Walk With Me Canada was involved in the largest human trafficking case in Canada, known as the Roma Hungarian labour trafficking case in Hamilton, where concurrent sentences were given to most of the offenders. The kingpin, Ferenc Domotor, was handed a significant sentence, but one that was concurrent.

At a post-sentencing gathering, where several of the victims attended after the sentence was handed down, we were able to discuss the court proceedings with the labour traffic victims. One of the young Hungarian men indicated he was not sure that the hell he had gone through was worth the trauma and post-traumatic stress he suffered, given the fact that the sentence was to be one sentence no matter how many victims were involved. Although he did not understand, in my view, concurrent versus consecutive, his assessment of the court proceedings and the sentence handed down by the court was that the amount served by Mr. Domotor would not have changed whether there was one victim or ten victims.

When this is coupled with the fact that multiple victims mean larger profits for the trafficker, consecutive sentences are a necessity for this heinous crime. Presently, a relatively low risk of having a more significant sentence for having two, three, or more victims of sex slavery or labour slavery is worth the financial gain. In other words, when you are able to garner upwards of $200,000 to $300,000 per trafficked victim in one year, and the only real risk in sentencing is a concurrent sentence for each additional victim, the trafficker is almost compelled to expand his business empire with little risk of significant ramifications to him in the criminal justice system here in Canada.

For those reasons, Walk With Me Canada supports this amendment.

Walk With Me Canada supports the amendment with respect to the “presumption regarding the exploitation of one person by another and adds circumstances that are deemed to constitute exploitation.”

Although the wording at first blush appears to provide some risk that innocent bystanders may be captured, the presumption is a necessary one for victims who are scared for their life. Some of the classic traits of trafficking in persons include threats to people's family, their own lives, and the lives of their friends. A lot of the time, the person has been transplanted from their roots to a foreign city, or even another country. As a result, being asked to testify is one of the scariest propositions of being rescued from trafficking.

In our experience, a lot of the women need to be removed from the city, or the province, for their own safety. The severe post-traumatic stress, anxiety, and depression that come with being victimized by their traffickers make testifying a deterrent, and it makes one reluctant to come forward. A reversal of the burden of proof, once a prima facie case has been put forward by the crown, is a welcome addition to the Criminal Code. Having the victim not testify, or not feel that her testimony is the only reason a police force will have to lay charges, will assist in the recovery process of victims.

Often, waiting for the Criminal Court proceedings to take place brings the recovery to a standstill, as they are singularly focused on their day in court, where they will have to face their trafficker again, and have the burden on their shoulders that the case will only be successful if they come and testify and put their life at risk.

For those reasons, Walk With Me Canada supports this amendment.

The amendment “adds the offences of procuring and trafficking in persons to the list of offences to which the forfeiture of proceeds of crime apply.” There are many statistics with respect to the profits made by human traffickers. Some of these statistics include trafficking one young woman for a profit of $280,000 to the trafficker in one year. Other statistics show that a sex-trafficked woman between the ages of 12 and 25 years can generate illicit tax-free income for the trafficker in the range of $300 to $1,500 per day. A government table, which was attached to our submission, shows that the average daily profit for one trafficked woman is in the range of $900, and an annual profit in the range of $280,000. A trafficker with 10 young women in his stable could have an annual profit in excess of $3 million. Backpage.com, an example of which we attached, is a unique way to find women in this country. Our example shows that five women were advertised from 11 a.m. to 4 a.m. in one hotel room. Also, if you look at it, the ranges were from $60 to $80 per half hour and $120 to $180 per hour. I looked at the attachment, and in fact the young lady in that attachment is actually being advertised at $200 per hour. You can appreciate the amount of profit you can make if you have four or five people doing that for you on any given day. It should be recognized that this is illicit income, and it's not subject to taxation. This is clear profit.

We're also aware, from our victims, that initially they see some proceeds of their being trafficked, and they are given nice things. Very quickly, once they are brainwashed by the trafficker, they receive less and less of the profit or material items, and the money goes into the coffers of the trafficker.

Anecdotally, we're aware that in the labour trafficking in Hamilton, one of the people who pleaded guilty owned a house in Ancaster, Ontario, that was listed at $750,000. This amendment would've allowed the crown attorney to have that family forfeit the home as proceeds of crime. RCMP surveillance and the evidence given at the trial, which I attended, show that many of the traffickers also had several bank accounts with significant funds in them, including welfare funds. They also could have been forfeited if this amendment had been made previously. As a result, the labour trafficker received a concurrent jail sentence, and in all likelihood a deportation, but he was able to keep all of his assets, including his bank account and his house.

The profit made by organized crime, street gangs, and entrepreneurial men who prey on young women and men in this country, as well as immigrant people who come to this country, needs to be stopped. Along with consecutive sentences, the risk of forfeiting all of the profits and their assets will be a deterrent to this heinous crime.

For the foregoing reasons, Walk With Me supports the three amendments. We hope they will assist in securing convictions that make the punishment proportional to the severity of the crime and that cause the traffickers to be deprived of the profits from their illicit activities.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

May 1st, 2013 / 3:30 p.m.
See context

Éliane Legault-Roy Responsible for communications, Concertation des luttes contre l'exploitation sexuelle

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I will follow my brief because I am not very comfortable.

Today Concertation des luttes contre l'exploitation sexuelle wishes to reiterate its support for Bill C-452, which was introduced by Maria Mourani, the member for Ahuntsic.

We believe that, by targeting procurers and the profits of an exploitation-based industry, this bill will guarantee better protection for women engaged in prostitution and the victims of trafficking for sexual purposes.

Ms. Mourani's bill promotes a better understanding of the essential connection between prostitution and trafficking, both of which are based to a large degree on inequality and, to paraphrase Gloria Steinem, are created by the same customers who seek unequal sexual relations. Bill C-452 emphasizes that connection by including a subsection on sexual exploitation in section 279.04 of the Criminal Code, which concerns trafficking, and by attacking procuring, a definite step toward achieving equality between men and women in Canada.

In Canada, where most human trafficking is carried on domestically, there is demand for sexual services in all communities, in all provinces, but most of the time it requires that hundreds, even thousands of young girls be transported around the country to remove them from their families, friends and social networks and to erase all trace of them.

We also see that massive numbers of women are occasionally transported to specific regions of Canada to meet increased customer demand at sports and other events.

The clarification made before paragraph (a) of subsection 279.01(1) of the Criminal Code is important in having domestic trafficking recognized as an organized system similar in all respects to international trafficking and as something that must be punished as such.

The inclusion of the presumption of exploitation of a person following subsection (2) of that same section is also a clear measure in favour of the protection of women, who are the main victims of trafficking in Canada. The reverse burden of proof removes an enormous weight from their shoulders, as they are often afraid of reprisals if they testify and prefer to remain silent to having to relive their ordeal by testifying.

In addition, since 80% to 90% of women victims of trafficking are being used to supply the sex industry, we think they should be treated the same way as the victims of procurers, who are already subject to the reverse onus of proof, as provided by subsection 212(3) of the Criminal Code.

Lastly, by providing for exemplary and consecutive sentences and the forfeiture of the proceeds of procurers and traffickers, Bill C-452 clearly indicates that the commoditization of women, who are imported and exported, sold and resold for the benefit of men through trafficking, is a serious crime that deserves a clear sentence.

In conclusion, since the sex industry responds solely to profit and customer demand, it is imperative that we attack the sources of this market. That is why we at Concertation des luttes contre l'exploitation sexuelle believe that focusing on procuring and the forfeiture of proceeds generated by human trafficking, as Ms. Mourani's bill does, is the first appropriate, urgently needed step in addressing the problem of human trafficking for sexual exploitation purposes in Canada.

We also believe that, to affirm our solidarity with women who too often have no choice and to guarantee real protection for prostitutes, prostitution should be decriminalized. We hope that the Bloc Québécois and the other political parties will soon take action to that end and tackle the sex industry and the customers who support it head on.

In the meantime, we hail Ms. Mourani's initiative and hope that her bill is passed by all members of Parliament. This is a step in the right direction, one that gives us hope that one day we will move beyond the concept of individual choice and collectively assert the right of women, of all women, not to be prostitutes.

Thank you.

May 1st, 2013 / 3:30 p.m.
See context

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Mike Wallace

Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to meeting number 71 of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights. Pursuant to the order of reference of Wednesday, March 6, 2013, we are studying Bill C-452, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (exploitation and trafficking in persons).

In our first hour we have two witnesses and in our second hour we have another panel of two witnesses.

Today, we have Éliane Legault-Roy from the organization Concertation des luttes contre l'exploitation sexuelle.

Thank you for coming.

From Walk With Me Canada Victim Services, we have Mr. Robert Hooper, who is the chair.

You both have 10 minutes to give an opening statement.

Please begin.

April 29th, 2013 / 5:25 p.m.
See context

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Mike Wallace

Okay. That's your time. Thank you very much.

Thank you, Inspector, and thank you, Sergeant, for coming here today and providing great feedback on today's bill.

I want to follow on with Monsieur Bélanger, that you are excellent representatives of your profession. We don't often get a chance to thank our police officers for the work they do in the field. We want to thank you for doing an excellent job, representing not only police officers from your respective police forces but policing in general across the country. Thank you for your efforts and your commitment to our communities.

Thank you very much for coming.

On Wednesday, we have two panels. There will be two witnesses in the first hour and two witnesses in the second hour, and we'll continue reviewing Bill C-452.

With that, the meeting is adjourned.

April 29th, 2013 / 4:40 p.m.
See context

Det Sgt Dominic Monchamp

Good afternoon. I would like to thank you for having invited me here today.

I have been working as a police officer at the Service de police de la Ville de Montréal, or SPVM, for 19 years, and have spent almost 15 of those years on sexual exploitation investigations. Today I have decided to speak to you about what is happening on the ground, to give you an overview of how human trafficking works and what tools Bill C-452 could provide to us.

What we have to understand is that victims of human trafficking do not come to the police. What is of note in this type of situation is that we have to conduct proactive investigations to find victims of human trafficking. That has to be our main concern. The section on human trafficking and Bill C-452 do not limit these victims' freedoms. Quite the opposite; they give police the tools they need to be proactive and save these victims. These people are victims of serious crimes that often are similar to torture.

It's very clear that people who have been raped, held captive, abducted and burned are afraid for their safety and for their lives. The victims are unanimous: when they finally agree to come to see us, they are terrified of dying. What they are most concerned about is not whether the individual who did this to them will be arrested; they want to be assured they will be protected if they speak out. The first reflex people have when they have lived through such atrocities for so long is not to go to the police. Instead, it is to try to get away, to try anything, but not to speak out.

This explains why, in 80% of the cases we handle, we go and meet the victims, but they refuse to speak to us or to provide a statement. The statement never happens because they are terrorized, or, from another perspective, because they don't consider themselves to be victims, based on the cycle. It is a long cycle, it was mentioned earlier that victims are manipulated, desensitized and seduced until they meet with the more violent aspects of human trafficking.

It is extremely interesting to note that the bill provides for presumption. I want to assure you that presumption does exist in investigation on the procuring of persons. It is already there but it does not give carte blanche to the police. It does not free us from having to produce proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

Here is an example of what presumption would allow us to do on the ground. Let's say that a trafficker controls six girls at the same time but that one of them manages to escape and does in fact agree to file a complaint. The other five will be terrorized, or not consider themselves to be victims, and will not want to do so. However, if there is presumption, we can use it and the testimony from the first victim as well as other investigation techniques to press charges regarding the other five victims. This is the kind of tool presumption would give us.

In other cases, we know that a trafficker controls a young woman. I could tell you about this kind of case all afternoon. If the young woman refuses to work, she will be locked up in the trunk of a car for an entire day or be made to kneel on an open rice bag in a living room somewhere all afternoon. We have the information; we know the woman works as a prostitute every day to bring in money, but we cannot build a case if she does not speak to us. However, with presumption and various investigation techniques, we would be able to press charges.

Human trafficking is a crime perpetrated over a long period, day after day, and it is often associated with other serious crimes such as kidnapping, forcible confinement, sexual assault, assault and death threats.

When human trafficking charges are laid, the charges that I have just described apply to 80% of the cases. Without making light of the seriousness of any crime of any type, we are not talking about a bank holdup. We are talking about predators who plan the exploitation of individuals, treat them as merchandise day after day, and take every possible step to make as much profit as they can, using these people.

Indeed, consecutive sentences for such serious crimes that have gone on for so long are clearly a deterrent. If you will recall the first part of my statement, when I mentioned that 80% of the victims will never come to see us, and when you think of the five- or six-year sentences that are given, and the fact that the victims want to be protected, you will understand that this will be extremely useful. I should also tell you that nearly all of the victims who finally agree to talk to us want to withdraw their testimony at some point in the process. Once again, it is for the same reasons; it is because they are afraid, scared, etc.

In one of the most recent cases where an individual was found guilty of human trafficking, the victim had to go back to court 15 times to be cross-examined by the defence in a way that defies description.

I apologize, I am somewhat emotional, but that is what I wanted to tell you. As for the rest, I would be happy to answer your questions.

April 29th, 2013 / 4:30 p.m.
See context

Inspector Gordon Perrier Inspector, Criminal Investigation Bureau, Division #43 (Major Crime Division), Winnipeg Police Service

Good afternoon. I'm honoured to be here today representing the Winnipeg Police Service, and I'm very pleased to speak with you on such an important issue.

Not unlike other urban centres in Canada, Winnipeg struggles with crimes of exploitation, procuring, luring, prostitution, and related criminal behaviour. Exploitation is not limited to cities or any one segment of our population. It's truly a community issue for all Canadians. Many of these crimes have their genesis in, or a connection to, human trafficking. I applaud the government for bringing into law specific sections of the Criminal Code to address these terrible events and give police real ability and methods to improve the lives of victims and stabilize those at risk. Legislation like this brings meaningful change to our communities and helps create a culture of safety.

The specific amendments in Bill C-452 including presumption of evidence for exploited persons, specific reference to a domestic context when speaking about trafficking, forfeiture provisions, and consecutive sentences are tangible items that both police and prosecutors have needed. Combatting exploitation requires a broad range of commitments on many fronts, and all the practices police and our partners employ come together when the laws are comprehensive.

Not unlike a puzzle, when pieces are put together you find strength and you can see the entire picture. To that end, I want to share with you some of our strategies and programs and methods as they relate directly to the current legislation and the amendments contained within Bill C-452.

The initiatives, strategies, and work practices of the Winnipeg Police Service have developed over a considerable time, always with a view to maximizing our resources, skill, knowledge, and abilities to address victim, community, or offender processes. For example, since 1990, officers of our sex crime unit have been part of a board that includes medical staff, a community outreach program called Klinic, victim service workers, and the RCMP. The goal of this group is to ensure that the practices and processes that are in place for sexual assault examination, interviews, and evidence gathering serve the interests of justice and the wellness, care, and dignity of victims.

Many victims these teams deal with are from exploited populations and we open doors for programming and longer-term care, and help make life changes.

Inside our service, we conduct yearly in-depth training on exploitation, sexual assault victim protocols, cycles of violence, and how to offer assistance. This training is mandatory for recruits and forms part of specialist training for all detectives.

In 2012 the child abuse unit partnered and helped found the Winnipeg Children's Advocacy Centre. This corporation is a child victims' centre governed by a board that includes police, justice, health, social service agencies, and victim services. The mission of this stand-alone centre is to facilitate multi-system collaboration and foster best practices in child exploitation investigations. Also, the centre ensures that victims receive sensitive and immediate support in a setting that puts their needs first. This set-up reduces system-induced stress faced by children who are victims of sexual or serious physical abuse.

The Winnipeg Police Service is also an active participant and contributor to the violent crime linkage system. More than two years ago, we changed our workflow internally and have a nearly 100% compliance rating for submissions and analysis. This has benefited local investigations and identified leads on cases that had run cold. These new leads have increased tenfold because of our changes in workflow and communication.

Since 2005, our integrated high-risk offender unit has been operating in partnership with the RCMP corrections and community groups. This unit aggressively monitors offenders for conditional order breaches and conducts surveillance operations on persons designated as a high risk to reoffend. They also facilitate Criminal Code section 810 order applications and public information notices.

Our missing persons unit was restructured in 2009. Currently, the unit manages approximately 6,600 missing person cases a year, many of which are chronic runaway children who need our help. We have developed a high-risk victim protocol strategy that aims to prevent the exploitation of youth and bring about stabilization in their lives. We do this by pairing a police officer and social worker together, shoulder to shoulder, to plan, manage, evaluate risk, and help each child as an individual. This program works. It brings a stable lifestyle to many and provides a real mechanism for police to identify those who prey on children in our malls, parks, and streets.

Finding missing kids is only the first part. We now probe further in these cases, and if we can bring charges of luring and of abduction of a child under 14 within the parameters of harbouring or concealing their whereabouts, we do so. Our vice unit is also involved in a number of tactics that focus on exploitation, prevention, and communication.

Deter and identify sex-trade consumer reports, or DISC reports, have formed part of our records management system since 2002. These reports often begin with front-line police officers conducting traffic stops. The information is automatically forwarded to the vice unit for analysis, and information such as behaviour, risk to the community, suspicious practices, or comments are noted and compared with ongoing cases.

Where children are potentially at risk, this information is shared with children's services, which have the ability under the provincial legislation to take proactive steps against the potential or actual offenders. The vice unit monitors known sex-trade websites and Internet advertisements daily. Undercover operations are conducted based on this information or these ads, and particular attention is given to exploitation, human trafficking, and child prostitution-styled ads. This has occurred for approximately five years.

The vice unit has regularly developed relationships with the Salvation Army; New Directions for Children, Youth, Adults & Families; Rossbrook House; Sage House; and the Native Women's Transition Centre Inc. These relationships have identified people who prey on the vulnerable for the purpose of forced entry into the sex trade. Vice investigations, human trafficking, cycles of exploitation and drug dependency, and techniques for helping sex trade workers are taught at recruit training and senior investigator levels.

In 2011, the Winnipeg Police Service assisted in the redevelopment of the curriculum for the province's core competency training course for understanding and working with sexually exploited youth. This exploitation training program is the only formal program in North America and is attended by social service workers, police, foster parents, health professionals, teachers, and corrections officers.

We also conduct programs to help both victims and offenders. Our prostitution offender program for johns began in 2002, and continues today. Approximately 50 to 70 offenders participate in this program each year. Conversely, our prostitution diversion program for sex-trade workers began in 2003, and also continues. Approximately 35 to 50 women complete multi-day, overnight programming each year. Police officers participate in all aspects of the program with social service workers, justice partners, and community specialists. Relationship building, trust, education, and change are our focus.

Our public campaign that is focused on exploitation, a sex trade reality check, has used public ads to raise awareness and to date has distributed more than 9,000 posters.

Another quarterly event is Project Return. This protocol includes social workers, both government and non-government, working with police during undercover police operations to assist with juvenile prostitution, treatment plans, and placement in safe, nurturing environments.

We have sponsored human trafficking training events in Winnipeg for police, crowns, and our partners to raise awareness and action. The Winnipeg Police Service has partnered on this subject with the University of Winnipeg and the University of Saskatchewan, by assisting doctoral students studying the dynamics of human trafficking and exploitation.

All of our practices have been looked at holistically in great detail over the last two years, and we recently realigned our missing persons unit and vice units within one division. All the units I spoke about previously are now contained in that division. This new division I speak of has been renamed the Specialized Investigations Division. This speaks to our commitment to victim-centred services, along with robust investigations that will bring those responsible for exploitation to account under the law.

In fact, Winnipeg police investigators just last year had a case where the specific human trafficking charges fell apart due to a number of factors, most of which were out of our control. Thankfully, investigators were able to regroup, continue the investigation on this gang associate, and bring about charges that resulted in a conviction and appropriate penitentiary term. This case had a procuring element, and it would have been both prudent and advantageous to continue the investigation from a forfeiture perspective.

Bill C-452 will provide opportunities and further accountability for those who offend. I can say with confidence that police are well versed in forfeiture investigation and presumption of evidence processes due to similar parallels and experiences in proceeds of crime law. The amendments in Bill C-452 will enhance our ability to remove the profit from exploitation crime. I know from my own experience as an organized crime investigator, that forfeiture and consecutive sentences work. Deterrence and breaking the cycle of profitability can change behaviour and prevent others from entering that offending cycle of behaviour, greed, and disrespect for others.

I do not have any direct recommendations today, but I do wish to express my hope that the resolve of legislators will not wane when it comes to human trafficking, exploitation, and improving the lives of all people within our borders.

Ladies and gentlemen, thank you very much.

April 29th, 2013 / 3:45 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Joy Smith Conservative Kildonan—St. Paul, MB

Thank you very much.

Thank you for coming to committee, Maria. Congratulations on your work on human trafficking.

Bill C-452 will add heavier penalties to human trafficking offences by requiring the imposition of consecutive sentences for engaging in this type of terrible conduct, in my opinion. It's the kind of thing we don't want in this country.

Do you agree that penalties for this type of offence should be severe, and if you do, why?

April 29th, 2013 / 3:30 p.m.
See context

Bloc

Maria Mourani Bloc Ahuntsic, QC

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I would like to greet all my colleagues and thank them for allowing me to speak on this very important bill.

My presentation is divided into two main sections. During the first one I will explain what led to the bill. Mainly, I want to tell you about the thought process for the bill. In the second part, I will focus on the various clauses.

First, this bill was created in three main steps over a year and a half. It took a long time to develop. My objective when I began was to understand the perspective of the people on the ground. The first step was therefore to meet with specialists on the ground who were in direct contact with victims of the trafficking and procuring of persons and with traffickers and pimps. This meant groups working with victims and police.

My objective in collecting this data was to understand legislative needs. Of course, there are other needs, such as awareness campaigns, resources for police investigations and resources for victims. In fact, there are very few shelters. We are in desperate need of shelters in Quebec. However, I was also interested in the legal aspect of this issue. Our efforts led to some very interesting points, which I will present later.

The second step after data collection was to translate these needs into a bill. I worked with our legislative drafters here at the House and we submitted a draft bill.

Finally, I went back to the partners we had consulted to show them the first version of the bill and see if there was anything to improve, change and so on. The bill was then presented to other groups that were not necessarily involved in its creation and development. We wanted to know what they thought to see whether there were any problems with the bill on the legal front, for example. I therefore met with members of the Quebec Bar. I do not remember the exact number of criminologists who were at the meeting, but there were a number of them. If I remember correctly, the consultation was in 2010. I presented the bill and it was very well received.

Bill C-612 was then tabled on December 15, 2010. It went through second reading on March 24, 2011, but unfortunately died on the order paper because of the election.

After the election, I again tabled the bill after making a few adjustments. It was sent back to the legislative drafters because, of course, my colleague Joy Smith had tabled her own bill on this topic. Her bill contained some provisions that were also in my bill. For example, extraterritoriality was removed from Bill C-452 even though it had been part of my original bill.

So the bill was sent back to the legislative drafters and a new version of it was produced with a few changes. I would say that about 95% of Bill C-612 is still there. The bill was tabled on October 16, 2012, and passed second reading in March. I believe it is important to mention the groups that worked on this bill because this is their bill. I am simply their spokesperson. The Conseil du statut de la femme requested to appear before the committee and also submitted a document on this topic.

I consulted police experts at the SPVM. Their work on the bill involved the moral aspect and the sexual exploitation of children aspect. I also consulted the Comité d'action contre la traite humaine interne et internationale; the Association féminine d'éducation et d'action sociale, better known as AFEAS; the Regroupement québécois des centres d'aide et de lutte contre les agressions à caractère sexuel; the Regroupement québécois des CALACS; Concertation-Femme; the Concertation des luttes contre l'exploitation sexuelle, which I believe will also be appearing before you; the Association québécoise Plaidoyer-victimes; the Collectif de l'Outaouais contre l'exploitation sexuelle, which is with us today; the diocèse de l'Outaouais de la condition des femmes; Maison de Marthe; and, of course, the YMCA of Quebec.

These groups have asked to be heard during the committee's proceedings. I really want to thank them for the work they have done for over a year and a half. They continue to promote this bill. I want to give a big thank you to all of these groups.

I do not know how much time I have left, Mr. Chair. I have many things to say.

April 29th, 2013 / 3:30 p.m.
See context

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Mike Wallace

(Motion agreed to)

Thank you very much.

Madame Mourani is here to talk to us for about an hour. We have an hour for you—so 10 minutes of introduction—from 4:30 to 5:30 on her Bill C-452.

The floor is yours, madam.

April 29th, 2013 / 3:30 p.m.
See context

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Mike Wallace

Ladies and gentlemen, it is my pleasure to welcome you to the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights, meeting number 70. According to our orders of the day, pursuant to order of reference of Wednesday, March 6, 2013, Bill C-452, an act to amend the Criminal Code (exploitation and trafficking in persons) will be in front of us today, Wednesday, and Monday of next week.

Before we begin with the mover of the bill, we have two budgets in front of us. They are both for witnesses we've had for the two previous private members' bills. One is $600 for the standing committee presentation. This was for Bill S-209, the prize fights. Would somebody move that for me?

Human TraffickingPetitionsRoutine Proceedings

April 24th, 2013 / 3:20 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Mark Eyking Liberal Sydney—Victoria, NS

Mr. Speaker, I rise to present a petition on behalf of 32 constituents in my riding calling on the government to support Bill C-452, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (exploitation and trafficking in persons).

Human TraffickingPetitionsRoutine Proceedings

April 24th, 2013 / 3:15 p.m.
See context

NDP

Raymond Côté NDP Beauport—Limoilou, QC

Mr. Speaker, I have a petition signed by a large number of people from the Quebec City region, in support of Bill C-452, which is designed to combat human trafficking and sexual exploitation.

April 22nd, 2013 / 4:50 p.m.
See context

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Mike Wallace

That's it, ladies and gentlemen. Thank you very much.

We don't have any agenda items for Wednesday so I'll cancel Wednesday's meeting.

We will start Bill C-452 on Monday.

Human TraffickingPetitionsRoutine Proceedings

April 15th, 2013 / 3:15 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Mark Eyking Liberal Sydney—Victoria, NS

Mr. Speaker, I have with me a certified petition signed by 65 residents from my riding calling on the government to support Bill C-452, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (exploitation and trafficking in persons) in combatting human trafficking and sexual exploitation.

Human TraffickingPetitionsRoutine Proceedings

April 15th, 2013 / 3:10 p.m.
See context

Bloc

Maria Mourani Bloc Ahuntsic, QC

Mr. Speaker, I am very proud to table a petition calling on all members to support Bill C-452, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (exploitation and trafficking in persons), which I introduced recently and which is currently being examined by the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights.

More than 100 people signed this petition, which calls for members to support the bill because sexual exploitation and trafficking in persons are serious crimes. The petition urges all members to ensure that this bill is read, amended and studied in committee as quickly as possible, before it returns to the House for third reading.

Human TraffickingPetitionsRoutine Proceedings

April 15th, 2013 / 3:10 p.m.
See context

NDP

Alex Atamanenko NDP British Columbia Southern Interior, BC

Mr. Speaker, the third one is in support of Bill C-452, dealing with human trafficking, which includes crimes committed within Canada and in foreign countries. The petitioners call upon the House of Commons to support Bill C-452, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (exploitation and trafficking in persons).

Exploitation and Trafficking in PersonsPetitionsRoutine Proceedings

March 26th, 2013 / 10:10 a.m.
See context

NDP

Lysane Blanchette-Lamothe NDP Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC

Mr. Speaker, today I am tabling a petition signed by men and women of Pierrefonds who want to bring our attention to the fact that trafficking in persons and sexual exploitation are serious crimes that we must fight vigorously. They are asking the House to support Bill C-452, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (exploitation and trafficking in persons).

Human TraffickingPetitionsRoutine Proceedings

March 8th, 2013 / 12:15 p.m.
See context

NDP

Raymond Côté NDP Beauport—Limoilou, QC

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to table in the House a petition signed by a large number of constituents in Beauport—Limoilou. This petition is in support of Bill C-452, which is designed to combat human trafficking and sexual exploitation.

The House resumed from March 1 consideration of the motion that Bill C-452, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (exploitation and trafficking in persons), be read the second time and referred to a committee.

Criminal CodePrivate Members' Business

March 1st, 2013 / 2:05 p.m.
See context

NDP

Laurin Liu NDP Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to speak to Bill C-452, which seeks to address the issue of human trafficking. I have already spoken several times about different aspects of this issue.

For example, in April, I spoke in favour of Bill C-310 to combat human trafficking in Canada and abroad. Then, in October, I spoke about Bill C-4, which seeks to combat the irregular arrival of refugee groups. At that time, I spoke out against the government's approach, which risks unduly punishing legitimate refugees rather than going after traffickers.

The issue of human trafficking is very broad and takes many forms. It is very important for Parliament to address the various forms of slavery because I firmly believe that the state has a duty to protect the most vulnerable members of society.

I am pleased to support Bill C-452, which amends the Criminal Code in order to provide consecutive sentences for offences related to procuring and trafficking in persons. It also creates a presumption regarding the exploitation of one person by another and adds circumstances that are deemed to constitute exploitation. Finally, it adds the offences of procuring and trafficking in persons to the list of offences to which the forfeiture of proceeds of crime apply.

I am pleased to support this bill because, first, instead of punishing victims of human trafficking, it seeks to punish procurers and traffickers. I would like to commend my colleague for introducing this bill because she really took the time to consult the community and get the primary stakeholders in the field involved.

I would like to mention some groups that support the principle of the bill. They are: the Council on the Status of Women, the Comité d'action contre la traite humaine interne et internationale, the Association féminine d'éducation et d'action sociale, the Regroupement des centres d'aide et de lutte contre les agressions à caractère sexuel, Concertation-Femme, Concertation des luttes contre l'exploitation sexuelle, the Association québécoise Plaidoyer-Victimes, the Collectif de l'Outaouais contre l'exploitation sexuelle, the diocèse de l'Outaouais de la condition des femmes and Maison de Marthe. It is important to consult experts and the community stakeholders affected by this issue.

In order to help hon. members grasp the scope of this problem, I would like to quote some excerpts from a recent RCMP report on this issue:

Recent convictions of human trafficking have mostly involved victims who are citizens and/or permanent residents of Canada trafficked for the purpose of sexual exploitation.

Human trafficking for the purpose of sexual exploitation has been mostly associated with organized prostitution occurring discreetly behind fronts, like escort agencies and residential brothels.

...foreign national sex workers who engage illegally in the sex trade are vulnerable to being exploited and trafficked.

Organized crime networks with Eastern European links have been involved in the organized entry of women from former Soviet States into Canada for employment in escort services in the Greater Toronto Area and possibly in massage and escort services in the Montreal area. These groups have demonstrated transnational capabilities and significant associations with convicted human traffickers in the Czech Republic, Germany, Belarus, and Israel.

Some convicted offenders of domestic human trafficking were found to be affiliated to street gangs known to law enforcement for their pimping culture.

[Finally, we note that] [s]ignificant human trafficking indicators were identified in some cases involving foreign national domestic workers who were smuggled into Canada by their employers. These live-in domestic workers were controlled, threatened, underpaid, and forced to work by their employers.

There is no question that the violence associated with this type of trafficking mainly affects women and girls, and therefore children. In 98% of the cases, the victims of sexual exploitation are women.

I want to point out that aboriginal women are overrepresented among victims. As I explained earlier, this is a worldwide phenomenon that represents a lot of money. According to the UN, this crime reportedly brings in $32 billion a year for organized crime groups.

Since we are talking about sexual exploitation, I want to mention the controversial comments made by Tom Flanagan that were reported in the news this week. Tom Flanagan is a former advisor and mentor to the Prime Minister. This week he said that looking at child pornography does not hurt anyone. This libertarian said:

What’s wrong with child pornography—in the sense that it’s just pictures?...I do have some grave doubts about putting people in jail because of their taste in pictures.

Although he later apologized, these uninformed comments are quite shocking coming from someone so educated and with so much influence. It is shameful. For someone to look at child pornography, the child pornography must first be produced, which means that children suffer and become victims of abuse.

As Elizabeth Cannon, the president of the University of Calgary, said, “...child pornography is not a victimless crime. All aspects of this horrific crime involve the exploitation of children.”

I know that the Prime Minister has condemned Tom Flanagan's shameful comments about victims of child pornography. But the Prime Minister has been surrounding himself with some rather unsavoury people, which would lead us to believe that he is the one who is lacking judgment. In addition to Tom Flanagan, who trivialized child sexual exploitation, there is Arthur Porter, the fraudster involved in the McGill University Health Centre scandal who was appointed by the Prime Minister to the Security Intelligence Review Committee. There is also Bruce Carson, a former member of the Prime Minister's inner circle who is now facing charges of influence peddling. And, of course, there is Senator Brazeau, who was appointed to the Senate even though there were many complaints of misconduct against him, and he has now been charged for assaulting a woman.

So it does not mean much to me when government members criticize opposition members for being too soft on criminals. They should start by taking a look at their own ranks. But I digress. I will now get back to talking about the content of the bill.

As I said at the beginning, this bill is a step in the right direction. However, we need to address the issue of human trafficking with a far more ambitious plan that mobilizes human, police, electronic and material resources and goes far beyond a simple bill. I would like to see a comprehensive program that addresses the root of the problem, helps victims and supports the work of law enforcement agencies. I would like to see this bill studied in detail in committee, so that we can specifically look at whether it is constitutional to reverse the burden of proof in relation to the presumption regarding the exploitation of a person.

The other problem with this bill is that it provides for consecutive sentences for offences of procuring and human trafficking. That is the key measure in this bill. It may be struck down by the courts. The Supreme Court of Canada often cites the principle of proportionality in sentencing. For example, the bill provides that a pimp who assaults and exploits a woman would receive consecutive sentences. But even if we pass this measure, the courts may adjust the sentences for each offence in order to comply with the principle of proportionality. The punishment must fit the crime.

Once again, I would like to say that I support the content and principle of the bill, but I would like to hear from experts in committee so that they can provide us with constructive proposals.

Criminal CodePrivate Members' Business

March 1st, 2013 / 1:55 p.m.
See context

NDP

Annick Papillon NDP Québec, QC

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise in the House today to speak about such an important issue, particularly since I am a young woman working in politics. Bill C-452 seeks to amend the Criminal Code in order to provide consecutive sentences for offences related to procuring and trafficking in persons.

Bill C-452 also makes it possible to reverse the burden of proof for this type of offence. The accused would therefore be considered guilty until he proves beyond doubt that he is not exploiting others. Finally, this bill adds the offences of procuring and trafficking in persons to the list of offences to which the forfeiture of proceeds of crime apply.

Public Safety Canada accurately describes human trafficking as one of the most heinous crimes imaginable, often described as a modern day form of slavery. It is nothing less than that. The victims, who are mostly women and children, are deprived of their normal lives and compelled to provide their labour or sexual services, through a variety of coercive practices all for the direct profit of their perpetrators. Exploitation often occurs through intimidation, force, sexual assault and threats of violence to themselves or their families.

Human trafficking is a scourge that knows no borders and affects many countries, including Canada. We must not put on our rose-coloured glasses. People need to know that this is happening here, not far from where we live.

According to the Department of Justice, it is difficult to provide accurate estimates on the full extent of trafficking in persons within Canada because victims are reluctant to come forward, and understandably so. Often victims are afraid to testify against a procurer for fear of reprisal.

The RCMP described human trafficking as a growing phenomenon. Statistics are hard to ascertain; however, estimates indicate that between 1,500 and 2,200 people are trafficked from Canada into the United States every year. The Royal Canadian Mounted Police estimates that around 600 women and children are trafficked into Canada each year for the purposes of sexual exploitation, and that this number rises to 800 when broadened to include those trafficked into Canada for other forms of forced labour.

Contrary to popular belief, victims of trafficking in Canada are not just young women from abroad. They are often Canadians. Unfortunately, trafficking of Canadian men within the country is a problem not often covered by studies and statistics about human trafficking, especially trafficking related to the sex trade. People who come to Canada to flee conditions of abject poverty in their own country can end up in a work environment where they are taken advantage of. So, too, can women from all over Canada, many of them young women in crisis and socially or economically disadvantaged women who leave their homes to join the sex trade in major Canadian cities.

There are a number of reasons why a vulnerable woman may be convinced to become a prostitute. We do not have to identify them all here. But no matter the circumstances, trafficking of Canadian men and women is a reality in our country, and it affects the most disadvantaged communities in particular.

For that reason, although Bill C-452 is a step in the right direction, we need a more comprehensive response to the problem of human trafficking. We have to wage this battle with practical resources. To solve the problem of human trafficking, we need a plan that will mobilize human, police, electronic and material resources that goes far beyond a simple bill. We need political leadership.

Surveillance of strip clubs, massage parlours and Internet networks and the creation of a joint investigative unit are solutions that should be studied. Canada must implement a strategy that will not only attack the source of the problem, but will also help the victims and support the work of our police services.

Julie Miville-Dechêne, president of the Conseil du statut de la femme du Québec, also recommends establishing shelters for female trafficking victims. She said:

There are no shelters specifically for female trafficking victims. But their issues are very different from those of domestic abuse victims.

However, there could be some problems with the proposed consecutive sentencing and the presumption that reverses the burden of proof for procuring and human trafficking offences. The reversal of the burden of proof could be challenged on constitutional grounds. As my colleague, the member for Windsor—Tecumseh, has said in the past, passing Bill C-452 does not guarantee that sentences will be much longer. The courts could potentially base their decision on the principle of proportionality, which means that sentences served consecutively may not end up being longer than if they had been served concurrently.

Despite these pitfalls, we will be supporting Bill C-452 so that it can be studied in committee. The problem is simply too serious to ignore. I have had the opportunity to meet with organizations in my riding that help boys, girls and women who are involved in prostitution. I would like to commend Projet intervention prostitution Québec and Maison de Marthe, which do excellent work with the limited resources available to them.

I want this government to take a comprehensive approach to the issues of prostitution and human trafficking. I would like it to address them here in the House, by amending the Criminal Code, as well as on the ground, where more help is needed for truly effective action. To me a comprehensive approach includes these simple bills that allow us to deal with other related issues.

This Conservative government has dismissed a bill as effective as Bill C-400 on social housing on more than one occasion. Organizations across Quebec are scrambling to get together and call on the Conservative government not to wait until the end of March 2014, but to renew the homelessness partnering strategy, the HPS, immediately.

This strategy provides a solution to associated problems and can help us take a comprehensive approach to this issue. It is important. The government must renew funding for the HPS immediately, for example, by adding an extra $50 million for Quebec. I know that my colleagues agree with this idea because it is an excellent decision. It is simple. We are talking peanuts here. Compared to all the F-35s and ships that will cost billions, $50 million is nothing.

The government is slowly destroying our social safety net, which would help us take a much more sensible and thoughtful approach to this problem we are facing.

I heard my colleague from Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine. Movies can sometimes have a huge impact on us. The movie that hit me the most was Human Trafficking, which came out in 2005 or 2006. This movie shows us how international the problems of human trafficking and prostitution are.

It is so insidious and pervasive that we must be aware. Who knows, we may have crossed paths with people who are experiencing these problems, in downtown areas, for example. We cannot be indifferent to what they are going through. My heart goes out to them, which is why I support Bill C-452. That said, I think we must do more, because small, simple actions could help us take a broader and more sensible approach.

Criminal CodePrivate Members' Business

March 1st, 2013 / 1:35 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to speak to Bill C-452 at second reading, in anticipation that it will pass and go to committee. It has the support of the Liberal Party to go to committee stage. The idea of having a discussion and hearing representations, possibly from different stakeholders coming before committee, we see as a positive thing. I trust and hope that the member from the Bloc Party will be receptive to amendments, because the issue needs to be addressed.

Slavery, exploitation or human trafficking needs to be put into a couple of different perspectives. One is locally, here in Canada. Also, we do have a responsibility, on the world front, to demonstrate leadership and address the broader issue of exploitation and the trafficking that occurs worldwide.

Most people would probably be surprised to know there are more people who are slaves today than there have been in the history of the world. It costs a lot less today to purchase a slave in many different countries than it did 150 or 200 years ago. There is a need for us to address the issue of slavery and human trafficking.

When I think of the stories I have heard over the last number of years, it is horrific what individuals have had to go through in order to survive. It is not to point to any particular country in the world, but we should all be reflecting on our own countries.

Earlier we were talking about the aboriginal community, our first nations. Many thoughts came through my mind when the member was talking about the first nations. It is not necessarily the most exploited community worldwide. I do not know all the statistics on the province of Manitoba and our country, but I know there is a real issue with exploitation of many of our children in our communities. These are not necessarily individuals who have been brought in from outside of Canada.

We need to get a better understanding as to why that exploitation happens. What is the environment we have created in many of our communities that allows our children to be exploited to the degree they are? It sickens me to see the number of young children, ages 8, 10, 12, who are being trapped in a situation where ultimately they are being used for the sex trade or to sell drugs or in gangs. A lot of that is done through exploitation.

We could talk quite a bit about that particular issue, but I want to focus more attention on the trafficking that brings people from outside of Canada into Canada and the United States, with special focus on Canada.

We need to recognize that human trafficking is an industry that facilitates things such as prostitution. I suspect the sex trade is likely the number one reason that human trafficking is taking place in Canada to the degree it is today. We see individuals coming from countries, whether from Asia or Europe, to Canada, and quite often they are forced into prostitution or strip clubs and so forth. It is not by choice.

I remember meeting a family while I was in the Philippines a number of years ago. The father told me he was very concerned about Canada because of what he had heard about someone else and that now his daughter was being recruited. He referred to an ad that said, “Go to Canada and work in the hospitality industry”.

This particular young lady bought into the ad and applied, and then found out that it was more the entertainment aspect of the hospitality industry. They had a difficult time getting their daughter back to the Philippines.

At the end of the day, I believe a great deal of misinformation is out there trying to attract individuals to Canada to enter into what I believe is likely the greatest exploitation there is today in human trafficking—that is, our sex industry here in Canada.

There are also areas of concern with respect to slavery. Maybe it is not to the same degree as in the continent of Africa or other countries, but we still need to be concerned about it. We need to be aware of and concerned about the degree to which people are being trafficked into Canada and turned into servants.

One of the things that I take a great sense of pride in is a decision Canada made a number of years ago. Paul Martin, the former prime minister, said that not only do we want to have national museums in Ottawa but we also would like to see them elsewhere. Winnipeg was awarded the human rights museum, which is nearing completion. I hope it will allocate space to the whole issue of human trafficking, because that issue is very real and alive today. By doing that, hopefully, we will be able to better educate the population.

I started off by saying that there are more people in slavery today than there ever have been in the history of the world. That was, I must admit, a bit of a news flash even for me. I do not think that people realize the degree of exploitation.

I think that is the reason the member brought forward this legislation. We do have some concerns about it and our Liberal Party critic, the member for Mount Royal, has addressed this bill and will continue to follow it, but at the end of the day it will bring more public attention to the issue, so in that sense I see it as a positive.

Ultimately, human trafficking exists today because of money. It is profit that really drives it to the degree we have today. In fact, only drug trafficking brings in more money illegally. Of the top three, number one is drugs, and then it might be a toss-up between human trafficking and illegal arms. I suspect it is likely human trafficking.

We have to demonstrate through leadership, and Canada is in a great position. Our provincial governments have departments of labour to deal with labour exploitation if it is occurring. A member made reference to live-in caregivers; if live-in caregivers are being exploited, we should be encouraging them to contact the provincial departments of labour and we should be encouraging members of parliaments or MLAs to speak out and be there for them in a very real and tangible way.

I believe that at the end of the day, Canada is in a great position to not only do more to fight it at the local level but also to demonstrate leadership around the world.

The House resumed from January 29 consideration of the motion that Bill C-452, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (exploitation and trafficking in persons), be read the second time and referred to a committee.

Human TraffickingPetitionsRoutine Proceedings

February 8th, 2013 / 12:05 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Mark Eyking Liberal Sydney—Victoria, NS

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to present 30 signatures from the constituents in my riding in support of Bill C-452, an act to amend the Criminal Code, which aims to fight sexual exploitation and human trafficking.

Criminal CodePrivate Members' Business

January 29th, 2013 / 6:20 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Joy Smith Conservative Kildonan—St. Paul, MB

Mr. Speaker, tonight I am so pleased to have the opportunity to support Bill C-452, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (exploitation and trafficking in persons).

As I have listened to the speeches tonight. It warms my heart to see members in the House who have worked together, and are continuing to work together, to stop this heinous crime in our country.

The member for Mount Royal has done much over the years to stand up for human rights. His Bill C-49 did much to bring the awareness of human trafficking to the forefront, and I thank him for that.

I also want to thank you, Mr. Speaker, as the member for Windsor—Tecumseh. When I first started working on my Bill C-268, I remember your support and your questions. I remember your input in making that bill go through.

As parliamentarians we are standing up against the perpetrators who feed on innocent victims in our country. Now public awareness is coming to the forefront. This is a pressing issue that we are addressing. Human trafficking, as we all know, continues to be a violation of fundamental human rights whose protection forms a basis of our free and democratic country. I want to thank all members for the input we have heard today.

Before I turn to the proposals in the bill itself, I would like to make some general comments on the nature of human trafficking and its severe impact on the victims to underscore the importance of ensuring the strongest possible criminal justice response to this crime.

Traffickers force victims to provide labour or services in circumstances where they believe their safety or the safety of someone known to them will be threatened. If they fail to provide that labour or service, they are deprived of the very rights that underpin a free and democratic society, a society that we hold dear in Canada.

The reality is that victims often suffer physical, sexual and emotional abuse, including threats of violence or actual harm to their loved ones. It does not only encompass the victims. One technique the predators have is to threaten their siblings and their relatives by telling them that they will be next. I have numerous cases where that has happened. That is how they control the victim from whom they earn so much money. Records show right now that a perpetrator earns between $250,000 and $260,000 a year from a victim. It is all about money. It is all about a despicable crime that is happening in our country that touches everybody. Everybody should be aware of it because sooner or later they will hear about it or be touched by it.

In Parliament today we are taking one more step to ensure that Bill C-452 is passed, examined in committee to make it even stronger. By working together, we can make this happen.

To further aggravate the human trafficking problem, the type of criminal conduct is not just something that happens occasionally on the margins of society. Rather, it is widespread in our communities as evidenced by the global revenues generated by it, which are estimated to be about $10 million U.S. per year. This puts human trafficking within the top three money-makers for organized crime. However, it is not just organized crime that is involved in human trafficking. So too are entrepreneurial people who feed off the suffering of innocent victims and control them so they can have money in their pockets to have a better life.

What are we doing about it? I am pleased to report that the government's response to this crime is strong and multifaceted.

First, we have a veritable arsenal of criminal offences that apply to this reprehensible conduct. In 2003 three trafficking offences were added to the criminal code. In 2010 a new offence of child trafficking was enacted through Bill C-268, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (minimum sentence for offences involving trafficking of persons under the age of eighteen years), which was sponsored by myself at that time. This offence imposes mandatory minimum penalties on those who traffic in persons under the age of 18.

In 2012 former Bill C-310, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (trafficking in persons), which was another bill sponsored by myself, extended extra territorial jurisdiction for all Criminal Code trafficking offences and enacted an interpretative tool to assist the court in interpreting the trafficking in persons provisions. Why did that happen? When we sat in a court, we heard lawyers trying to prove that the victim initially was not afraid. Was not afraid, why? How perpetrators work is the victim is not afraid. Most perpetrators come on as the victim's friends. They give the victims everything they want. It is only after they separate them from their infrastructure, family, community and friends and get them alone and take all their identification does the relationship change.

That is when the victims are beaten, raped and shot up with drugs. They are unrecognizable when they are seen on the street corners. These are innocent victims who need the love, care and rescuing to renew their lives. Many young girls who have been rescued are doing phenomenal things.

I was at a special event for Walk With Me, with Timea Nagy, a former trafficking victim in our country. She has done much to rescue victims, much to help restore the lives of these innocent victims.

All of these things, in addition to the trafficking specific offence contained in the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, section 118, which prohibits transnational trafficking and the numerous Criminal Code offences that address trafficking-related conduct, such as forcible confinement, kidnapping, sexual assault and uttering threats, are few examples of the arsenal of crime bills that we have to protect the innocent victims in our country.

That is not all. In recognition of the multifaceted nature of this problem, our government launched the national action plan to combat human trafficking June 6, 2012. The action plan recognizes that a comprehensive response to human trafficking must involve efforts to ensure what we refer to, and I know everyone here in the House is familiar with, as the four Ps: the protection of victims; the prosecution of offenders; partnerships with key players; and the prevention of the crime in the first place.

All activities are coordinated through the human trafficking task force, which is led by Public Safety Canada. This is without a doubt a comprehensive response to a complex problem, but more can always be done. Where more can be done, more should be done, especially when efforts serve to address a crime as insidious as human trafficking.

That is why I commend the member for Ahuntsic who has put forward Bill C-452, which proposes a number of reforms that would strengthen the response I have just described.

It seeks to impose consecutive sentences for trafficking offences and any other offence arising out of the same event or series of events. The bill would also create a presumption that would assist prosecutors in proving the main human trafficking offence. It would require a sentencing court to order the forfeiture of the offenders property unless they could prove their property was not the proceeds of crime.

The very first trafficking case that came to justice in Canada was a very short while ago. It was the Imani Nakpangi case where a 15 and a half year old girl was trafficked. He made a lot of money out of her, over $360,000 that we know of today. The forfeiture of the proceeds of that crime is so important. Bill C-452 has that element in the bill.

Although some amendments would be required to address specific legal concerns, Bill C-452 would undoubtedly strengthen the response to human trafficking and as such merits all our support.

Legal concerns would have to be addressed. For example, the bill should not overlap with amendments that have already been enacted by previous bills, such as Bill C-310, as this would cause confusion in the law. We do not want that to happen. The bill should also avoid compromising the government's efforts to defend the living on the avails offence along with other prostitution-related Criminal Code offences. These are the kinds of things that we will examine and work on in committee, and we are very proud to do that.

I want to thank the member once again for her hard work on this human trafficking issue. I want to thank all members in the House for taking up this cause and protecting the rights of innocent victims.

Criminal CodePrivate Members' Business

January 29th, 2013 / 6:10 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Irwin Cotler Liberal Mount Royal, QC

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise in debate on Bill C-452, on the question of human trafficking and how best to combat it. In particular, this legislation would seek to strengthen the provisions that punish exploitation and trafficking in persons.

I would like to congratulate my colleague from Ahuntsic for this bill and this very important step.

The true measure of a society's commitment to equality and human dignity is the protection it affords its most vulnerable members. And victims of human trafficking are some of the most vulnerable.

Accordingly, we must recognize and denounce human trafficking as the persistent and pervasive assault on human rights that it is, while providing increased protection for those who are most vulnerable to this massive criminal violation of human rights, namely women and children. At the same time, we must work to bring the perpetrators to justice and ensure that human traffickers are held to account fully for this reprehensible criminal conduct. My remarks this evening will focus on the implications this bill would have for the justice system, while situating the debate in the broader context of how we ought to combat human trafficking.

The crime of human trafficking, as I have said many times in this House, is one of the most pernicious, persistent and pervasive assaults on human rights. According to the 2012 United States Department of State report on human trafficking, an estimated 27 million people worldwide each year are victims of various crimes of exploitation and servitude, while an estimated $32 billion is generated by this immoral and illegal trade, making it one of the fastest growing criminal industries in the world today. The struggle to eradicate this crime, therefore, must certainly include legal tools to prosecute the offenders. It must also include policies to protect and support the victims while engaging in public education efforts to promote awareness of the trends and the means used to exploit and traffic the victims.

Accordingly, a holistic approach to this problem would require addressing the social factors that allow the crime of exploitation to occur in communities across our country, while working with all levels of government and community leaders to identify trends and patterns of exploitation, to communicate with the victims and to support the victims and their families during these moments of tremendous vulnerability. I commend the member for Ahuntsic for her involvement in this regard with the various stakeholders for this purpose.

To combat human trafficking, we need to do more than just impose new criminal penalties. For example, we need to correct the flaws in our immigration system because they leave temporary and foreign workers open to exploitation and abuse by their Canadian employers.

Bill C-452 makes a number of important amendments to the Criminal Code. First, it provides for consecutive sentences to be served for human trafficking convictions. Second, it grants the Canadian judiciary jurisdiction over human trafficking offences whether they are committed in Canada or abroad. Third, the bill clarifies the provisions related to human trafficking involving sexual exploitation. Fourth, it creates a presumption regarding the exploitation of one person by another. Finally, the bill adds the offences of procuring and trafficking in persons to the list of offences to which the forfeiture of proceeds of crime apply.

All of these proposed changes are indeed well intentioned, but some are somewhat flawed, particularly when viewed from a charter perspective. The Liberal Party will support this legislation and vote to send it to committee for further study and review in the hope that the concerns may be appropriately addressed.

I will begin with a provision that I wholeheartedly support.

The legislation expands the scope of the human trafficking provision in the code to the international arena. This is an important and most welcome change to our law. Simply put, the reach of this egregious trafficking crime is beyond our national borders and our laws must therefore reflect this reality.

For many human trafficking victims, exploitation may bring them to Canada. However, the original incident of abuse or threats made to their families occurs in far distant lands. We must seek justice not only for the final leg of this crime, but for the full scope of the abuse and cruelty inflicted on victims by their abusers.

Accordingly, while I support that provision and the provisions relating to human trafficking that include sexual exploitation, as well as extending or adding the offences of procuring and trafficking to the list of offences to which the proceeds of crime would apply, I am concerned by some other sections of the legislation. For example, Bill C-452 provides that sentences imposed upon a conviction of human trafficking are to be served consecutively to any other sentence imposed and punishment for an offence arising out of the same event or series of events.

I understand the well-intentioned motive behind this recommendation. My concern is that doing this could limit judicial discretion in a way that not only encroaches on judicial independence but may, however inadvertently, result in sentences that infringe upon charter-protected rights. Certainly these heinous acts should be punished severely. However, there may be situations where the imposition of consecutive, rather than concurrent sentencing is inadvisable. This is why judges should be allowed to retain their discretion in this regard, though certainly at committee we could address whether it might be best to encourage such sentences while perhaps not specifically requiring them.

As well, the bill establishes a presumption under section 279.01(3) of the Criminal Code that may be overly broad. It reads:

—a person who is not exploited and who lives with or is habitually in the company of or harbours a person who is exploited shall, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, be deemed to be exploiting or facilitating the exploitation of that person.

While one of the major issues in combatting trafficking since the crime of exploitation was first introduced in our Criminal Code has been the low number of criminal convictions for this crime, we should nonetheless be very mindful of casting too wide a net as this could raise both charter and common law concerns. Again, I am hopeful this can be addressed at committee.

Another change proposed by the legislation, which I support, modifies section 279 of the Criminal Code by enumerating the various elements of the crime of exploitation, particularly sexual services. This is an important change, in part because our own Department of Justice has found that trafficking for sexual exploitation is more prevalent in Canada than any other form of exploitation, especially in our large urban centres. By adding these new provisions in the code, we would provide law enforcement officials with additional tools to take on this challenge and better protect the Canadian public.

Let me reiterate that while it is vital that our criminal justice system be equipped to handle the full prosecution of this brutal crime, any success on this issue will only come with greater public awareness, mobilization and participation in combatting the crime to begin with. Because the perpetrators of human exploitation count on various social stigmas to isolate their victims, it is vital that we remove these stigmas and those barriers that prevent victims from seeking assistance. We must strengthen our grassroots strategy to detect and prevent human trafficking to begin with, as well as to support and protect victims in a manner that would enhance their co-operation and ability to report this abuse. As a country looking to address this challenge, we must not only seek to punish those who do harm to the innocent, we must also seek to heal and care for those who have been harmed in this fashion.

In summary, I am hopeful that the bill will be improved in committee. I applaud my colleague from Ahuntsic for bringing it forward and for her hard work on this issue, as well as that of the member for Kildonan—St. Paul. I am hopeful that by working together we can eradicate this evil of human trafficking in Canada once and for all.

Criminal CodePrivate Members' Business

January 29th, 2013 / 6 p.m.
See context

NDP

Françoise Boivin NDP Gatineau, QC

Mr. Speaker, I am very proud and happy to rise in this House today to speak to Bill C-452, which was introduced by the member for Ahuntsic. This is not exactly her first try, but I hope it will be the last and that it will be successful, possibly just as successful as the work that was done by the member for Kildonan—St. Paul on Bill C-310. I had the pleasure of examining this bill, debating it and discussing it. It opened my eyes.

I come from Gatineau and we do not often hear about human trafficking there. I learned about it when we examined the bill from the member for Kildonan—St. Paul. This will sound strange, but I also met with the US ambassador-at-large, who came to speak to me about human trafficking and how this problem exists all over the world. I was then able to see that issues that we sometimes consider foreign are also going on right here at home. It can be quite ugly, even horrific, as described by the member for Ahuntsic, and it is often happening right under our noses and we have no idea.

As the justice critic for the official opposition, the New Democratic Party, I can say that we will support sending our colleague's Bill C-452 to committee. I have also taken note of some of the comments the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice made.

When it comes to justice issues, the NDP always wants to be reasonably satisfied with the laws that are passed and that have a significant impact in terms of justice. These laws must pass the tests they will be subject to when they go before the courts. As legislators, we must do our job properly.

I wish I had a little more time. Five minutes is not long enough to ask questions. We have to talk about reversing the burden of proof. In cases like this one, that is a real concern given the seriousness of the offences. Still, we have to see if this passes the test to which the courts usually subject such a reversal of the burden of proof. This always seems counter to the presumption of innocence that is central to criminal law in Canada.

It is also important to ensure that laws do not contradict one another. The parliamentary secretary alluded to that. Will the passage of Bill C-310 cause parts of Bill C-452 to be reviewed? Are some of these elements in conflict? At first glance, I do not think so. However, we will consider all of these issues during meetings of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights once we complete our two hours of debate here. From what I have seen, I do not think that our colleague will have any trouble getting her Bill C-452 referred to committee. That will give us the opportunity to hear from witnesses.

The fact that we have the right to debate these issues, to have our say and to hear from witnesses is extremely important. As I said, if not for Bill C-310, even people who watch television, who are well-informed and up to date, would not have had the opportunity to hear first-hand about what is going on, often under their very noses, what is happening to society's most vulnerable people, to women and children. The situation is appalling. It would serve us well to hear about other specific cases.

I was pleased to see that in my region, the Outaouais, there was a great deal of support in the community from women's groups. My colleague mentioned the Collectif de l'Outaouais contre l'exploitation and the diocèse de l'Outaouais, among others, but I know even more groups that have told me that they support this bill.

I will support any law that we can enact to eliminate these scourges. We have to do everything we can and use every tool we have to stop this.

The message I would like to send to my friends opposite is that it takes people to implement these great laws. If we have good laws against human trafficking, then we have to ensure that we have the police officers needed to do the work and to find these vile human traffickers. We must drag them before the courts and they must serve these sentences so that one day we will no longer have to adopt such laws. When we go home, we have to be able to say that we did a good job because the most vulnerable are not being sexually exploited, tortured or are afraid to speak out and stop being victimized. Would it not be wonderful to have a society where there are no victims?

In addition to these fine speeches and bills, we have to ensure that there is a coherent approach. If we say that we support the victims and that we want to be there to help them, then we have to provide assistance and services. If we say that we are against the criminals, then we have to ensure that we catch these damn criminals and that we have enough police officers. We can reverse the burden of proof all we want, but if the victim is terrified and will never report the horror experienced, all this work is in vain.

We have to realize that this is happening in our communities. It may be happening in a street not far from our own homes. It is scary, but it does happen. We have to have our eyes wide open and realize that a bill such as this one solves real problems. However, it takes more than that.

The House resumed consideration of the motion that Bill C-452, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (exploitation and trafficking in persons), be read the second time and referred to a committee.

The Criminal CodePrivate Members' Business

January 29th, 2013 / 5:50 p.m.
See context

Delta—Richmond East B.C.

Conservative

Kerry-Lynne Findlay ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to join in the second reading debate on Bill C-452, an act to amend the Criminal Code (exploitation and trafficking in persons). I believe the bill addresses a matter of utmost importance: the criminal justice system must respond effectively to the crime of human trafficking.

Bill C-452 seeks to achieve the important goal of strengthening the criminal justice system's response to this heinous crime. Bill C-452's predecessor, Bill C-612, an act to amend the Criminal Code (trafficking in persons), also sponsored by the member of Parliament for Ahuntsic, proposed similar amendments but died on the order paper at second reading with the dissolution of Parliament in 2011.

The objectives of the bill merit support. Its proposals seek to hold offenders accountable, impose penalties that befit the severity of the crime and assist in ensuring that offenders do not reap the rewards of their wrongdoing. There are, however, some legal issues raised by the bill's proposals, which I have no doubt can be addressed through amendments.

Bill C-452 proposes to amend the Criminal Code in a number of different ways.

First, it seeks to require that sentences imposed for procuring, section 212, and trafficking offences, sections 279.01 to 279.03, be served consecutively to any other sentence imposed. It also seeks to clarify that the main trafficking offence, section 279.01, would apply regardless of whether the crime occurred in a domestic or international context.

Further, it would add a presumption that an accused is exploiting a trafficking victim if he or she is shown to be habitually in the company of that victim. It would modify the definition of exploitation for the purposes of the trafficking offences to include specified means.

It would also modify the provision that imposes a reverse onus for forfeiture of proceeds of crime for certain offences to apply to both procuring and trafficking offences. Finally, it would make a small technical amendment to the French definition of exploitation, in section 279.04.

One concern raised by certain proposals in the bill involves the Bedford case, which is currently before the Supreme Court of Canada. Bedford involves a Charter challenge to three prostitution-related Criminal Code provisions, including living on the avails of prostitution offence, paragraph 212.(1)(j), which is contained in the procuring provision, section 212. Any amendments impacting on this provision could compromise the government's defence of its constitutionality.

Another concern is that some of the proposals relate to issues already addressed by former Bill C-310, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (trafficking in persons), which was sponsored by the hon. member for Kildonan—St. Paul and came into force in June 2012.

Former Bill C-310 extended extraterritorial jurisdiction for all Criminal Code trafficking offences and clarified the definition of exploitation in section 279.04 by creating an interpretive tool to assist courts in determining whether a person has exploited another for the purposes of the Criminal Code trafficking offences.

New amendments that overlap with recently enacted reforms could cause confusion in the law, which may create inconsistency in enforcement and interpretation. These concerns and others could be addressed through amendments to ensure consistency and clarity in the law and manage legal risk.

The bottom line, however, is that we should all support any proposals that would strengthen our response to a crime that is as pernicious and heinous as human trafficking. This crime is commonly referred to as a form of modern-day slavery.

There has been some confusion, both within Canada and internationally, about the nature of this crime. Given the breadth of the issue, the complicated way in which it can be carried out and the diversity of both its victims and its perpetrators, it is no wonder that the global community has struggled with defining it.

However, I can say to Canadians that our government continues to take steps to improve our responses to this very destructive criminal activity.

On June 6, 2012, the government launched Canada's national action plan to combat human trafficking to enhance our ability to prevent this crime, better support victims and ensure that traffickers are held accountable. We are directing more than $25 million over four years to implement this plan.

Specifically, the national action plan emphasizes the need for awareness in vulnerable populations, support for victims, dedicated law enforcement efforts and for all Canadians to prevent the trafficking of individuals.

Among other things, the national action plan launched Canada's first integrated law enforcement team dedicated to combatting human trafficking; increased front-line training to identify and respond to human trafficking and enhance prevention in vulnerable communities; provides more support for victims of this crime, both Canadians and newcomers; and strengthens the coordination with domestic and international partners who contribute to Canada's efforts to combat human trafficking.

Further to this, Canada ratified the United Nations protocol to prevent, suppress and punish trafficking in persons, especially women and children. The protocol's definition of human trafficking is consistent with Canada's four specific trafficking in persons offences, which provide us with a comprehensive domestic definition of this horrible crime. There are also many other Criminal Code offences that can be used to address related conduct.

As I mentioned, we have four trafficking-specific offences in our Criminal Code. The main offence of trafficking in persons, section 279.01, protects all persons by prohibiting the recruitment, transportation or harbouring of a person for the purposes of exploitation.

The child trafficking offence, section 279.011, is the same as the main trafficking offence, with the exception that it imposes mandatory minimum penalties for trafficking in children. It was enacted by another bill sponsored by the hon. member for Kildonan—St. Paul, former Bill C-268, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (minimum sentence for offences involving trafficking of persons under the age of eighteen years), which came into force in June 2010.

I noticed that my colleague from the Bloc, who was speaking, mentioned a person under the age of 12. This unfortunately is something that does touch our children.

The two other trafficking-specific offences prohibit receiving a material benefit from the trafficking of a person and withholding or destroying documents in order to facilitate the trafficking of a person, sections 279.02 and 279.03. The Criminal Code also defines exploitation for the purposes of these offences in section 279.04.

Bill C-452 would add heavier penalties to this important group of offences by requiring the imposition of consecutive sentences for engaging in this type of reprehensible conduct. No one would disagree that penalties for this type of offence should be severe.

Bill C-452 would also require a sentencing court to order the forfeiture of offenders' property unless they disprove that their property is the proceeds of crime. We must ensure that traffickers are not permitted to keep the financial benefits of their insidious exploitation of others.

Bill C-452 would also create a presumption that would assist prosecutors in proving the main trafficking offences by proving a related fact, that the accused lived with or was habitually in the company of an exploited person. This type of offence is very difficult to investigate and prosecute, especially given that witnesses are usually afraid to come forward due to threats and intimidation. In particular, such a presumption could assist in holding an accused accountable or the prosecution's case rests heavily on the fact that the accused was living with or habitually in the company of an exploited person. However, this proposal requires amendments to ensure that it applies equally to the child trafficking offence, and the language should also be consistent with other Criminal Code presumptions so that the proposed presumption achieves its goal. These amendments would assist in securing convictions, ensure that punishment is proportional to the severity of the crime and deprive offenders of their ill-gotten gains.

I believe these are goals we can all support.

The Criminal CodePrivate Members' Business

January 29th, 2013 / 5:30 p.m.
See context

Bloc

Maria Mourani Bloc Ahuntsic, QC

moved that Bill C-452, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (exploitation and trafficking in persons), be read the second time and referred to a committee.

Mr. Speaker, after a number of years of work and consultation, it is a great honour for me to introduce in the House Bill C-452, which seeks to help victims of human trafficking obtain justice in an environment in which they are better protected.

This bill also seeks to help the police officers and prosecutors who are working to combat this new form of slavery—let us say it—get the tools they need to lay charges and ensure that criminals are given sentences that reflect the seriousness of their crimes.

I would like to thank the individuals and groups who worked with me to put this bill together, including police officers from the SPVM morality branch and child sexual exploitation unit, criminal lawyers from the Barreau du Québec and women's and human trafficking victims' advocacy groups, such as the Comité d'action contre la traite humaine interne et internationale, Afeas, the Regroupement québécois des centres d'aide et de lutte contre les agressions à caractère sexuel, Concertation-Femme, Concertation des luttes contre l'exploitation sexuelle, the Association québécoise Plaidoyer-Victimes and Maison de Marthe. These groups were very involved in the drafting of this bill.

I would also like to thank everyone else who has supported this bill, namely the Collectif de l'Outaouais contre l'exploitation sexuelle, the diocèse de l'Outaouais de la condition des femmes and, of course, the Conseil du statut de la femme du Québec.

Before introducing the bill, I would like to quickly describe human trafficking in Canada. Unfortunately, it is a rather significant problem in Canada and also in Quebec.

There is no question that, in Canada, an estimated 80% to 90% of the victims of trafficking are destined for the sex trade. There are also victims exploited for forced labour in Canada. This is quite atypical, but it does exist nevertheless.

Canada is unfortunately considered to be a country of recruitment, destination and transit, transit to the United States in particular. The most popular cities are Fort Lauderdale, Miami, New York and Las Vegas, as you can imagine. Canada is also considered a tourist destination: not just the usual tourism, but also sex tourism.

Contrary to what one might think, this sort of thing does not happen only in developing countries. Criminal Intelligence Service Canada indicates in its 2001 report that, in Canada, the average age of entry into prostitution is 14. In Canada, the majority of victims of trafficking are women between the ages of 12 and 25.

According to 2004 figures from the U.S. State Department, every year an estimated 1,500 to 2,000 persons are victims of trafficking from Canada to the United States. It is estimated that traffickers bring approximately 600 women and children into Canada to service the Canadian sex industry.

The main points of transit and destination for victims of interprovincial and international trafficking are Montreal, Toronto, Winnipeg and Vancouver. The Sûreté du Québec estimates that 80% of the strip clubs in Quebec under its jurisdiction are owned by criminal groups, often under fronts. So this is an industry that is dominated by organized crime and, unfortunately, street gangs.

Girls recruited in Atlantic Canada can wind up in Quebec, Ontario, Alberta or British Columbia, and vice versa. They are on the move. That is typical of human trafficking. Although this odious trade is dominated by organized crime, street gangs have become new players in recent years. The Montreal police service has declared human trafficking to be one of its priorities in the fight against crime.

It is thought that since the end of the 1990s, street gang members have transitioned from small-time recruiters to high-level pimps, specializing in child prostitution of young girls, mostly between the ages of 11 to 25. A girl can bring in around $280,000 a year, depending on her looks and age. Twenty girls could bring in around $6 million. That is a lot of money.

This is a business with little risk and is inexpensive to manage. Most of these guys say that they just have to beat, rape or torture the girl or give her some drugs and she will go to the meeting on her own. As it stands right now, the punishments are insignificant. For example, a pimp in Peel region exploited, tortured and raped a 15-year-old girl for two years. This earned him about $360,000 a year and he was sentenced to three years.

This bill would bring justice to the victims and make it easier for police officers and prosecutors. What does the bill do? Many prosecutors and police officers I spoke to told me that, in general, human trafficking was seen as an international phenomenon and that people were trafficked either from Canada to other countries or from other countries to Canada. Unfortunately, the Criminal Code is misinterpreted.

This misconception is gradually disappearing, but there are still some people who believe it. Young people from the regions of Quebec or from aboriginal reserves across Canada are unfortunately ending up in trafficking rings that bring them to large Canadian cities and tourist areas such as Niagara Falls or Montreal during the Grand Prix.

Domestic trafficking definitely happens in Canada. In my opinion, it accounts for a significant proportion of criminal activity in Canada. Victims of this type of human trafficking are between 14 and 25 years of age. The bill before us improves subsection 279.01(1) by making it clear that human trafficking is not only an international phenomenon, but also a domestic one. I have added the phrase, “Every person who, in a domestic or international context, recruits, transports...” This clarification will ensure that individuals, police officers and prosecutors understand exactly what that section means.

The current section 279.04 includes provisions on trafficking in organs and forced labour. As we all know, most human trafficking is for purposes of sexual exploitation, and as such, I added subsection 279.04(1.1), which is specifically about sexual exploitation. This definition, if I can call it that, is drawn from the Palermo protocol on human trafficking and international crime, which Canada ratified on May 13, 2002. This addition addresses all aspects of sexual exploitation, thereby enabling Canada to fulfill its Palermo protocol commitment.

On another note, human trafficking and procuring offences are often associated with other violent crimes. However, even when several charges are associated with a particular incident, traffickers often get away with short sentences because they are served concurrently. Unfortunately, sentences for human trafficking are softer than sentences for drug trafficking.

This is despite the fact that these people, whom I would call slavers, commit very serious crimes. Victims are tortured, confined, raped, forced into prostitution and so on. It is important to take all of the factors related to an incident into account. This bill would ensure that sentences for human trafficking or procuring and associated crimes are served consecutively.

The other problem that police officers and prosecutors have raised is their ability to help or persuade a victim to testify. Those practising in this area of the law often find that victims do not want to testify. Why? Because they are experiencing severe post-traumatic stress and are, quite naturally, afraid of being victimized. Many groups that work with these victims have told me that the victim should no longer have to bear the burden of proof.

Subsection 212(3) of the current Criminal Code already includes the notion of reversal of the burden of proof in cases of procuring. The same reversal of the burden of proof for the offence of trafficking was therefore added to this bill in subclause 279.01(3).

Therefore, as soon as the police have enough proof to lay charges, they will not necessarily need a victim's testimony. The reversal of the burden of proof exists for procuring. I believe that it should simply also be applied to human trafficking.

My favourite part of this bill deals with the forfeiture of proceeds of crime. Unfortunately, it is well known in the policing world that human trafficking is very profitable. It is profitable because a girl can bring in a lot of money for a pimp and it is highly unlikely that she will file a complaint against him. The pimp does not need to manage anything or make large purchases to run the business. So the pimp makes a lot of money.

Currently, subsection 462.37(2.02), which deals with forfeiture of proceeds of crime, allows for criminally obtained goods to be seized in cases of criminal organization offences punishable by five or more years of imprisonment and offences under section 5, 6 or 7 of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act.

I feel that human trafficking and procuring offences should also be covered by this section. This bill adds those two provisions to section 462.37.

To conclude, I would like to ask my colleagues to do something meaningful for victims of human trafficking. We need to remember that we do not need to go to Thailand to see children as young as 12, 13 or 14 in this business. And, unfortunately, we cannot forget that adults are victims of this business as well. The majority of the victims of this business—if we can call it that—are women, young girls and children. I feel it is more a form of slavery. I believe that we need to rise above partisan politics on this issue. It is our duty to strengthen the human trafficking provisions of the Criminal Code.

I would like to thank the members, and I ask them to support this bill in the name of justice and, above all, in the name of humanity.

November 28th, 2012 / 3:30 p.m.
See context

Committee Researcher

Michel Bédard

Bill C-452 would amend the Criminal Code in respect of exploitation of a person by another and procuring and trafficking in persons.

This bill does not appear to be outside federal jurisdiction. It does not appear to clearly violate the Constitution, including the charter. It does not concern questions already voted on in the current session, and it does not concern questions similar to items of government business currently on the order paper.

Criminal CodeRoutine Proceedings

October 16th, 2012 / 10:05 a.m.
See context

Bloc

Maria Mourani Bloc Ahuntsic, QC

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-452, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (exploitation and trafficking in persons).

Mr. Speaker, trafficking in persons is an increasingly common global phenomenon, and unfortunately, Canada is not immune.

According to 2007 figures released by the UN, the annual proceeds of this criminal activity are estimated at $32 billion. It is the third-largest criminal trade after drugs and weapons trafficking.

The main entry points into Canada include Montreal, Toronto, Winnipeg and Vancouver. Canada is considered to be a country of recruitment, destination and transit, and even a sex tourism destination. Our current laws must be reviewed in the age of this new, modern-day slavery.

I applaud the determination of one my colleagues, the hon. member for Kildonan—St. Paul, and her efforts to combat human trafficking. She has also introduced two bills on this matter in the House.

Thus, my bill is part of a broader effort to combat this particular crime, which destroys lives.

On the one hand, this bill sets out consecutive sentences for offences related to trafficking in persons and prostitution. Thus, it sets out tougher sentences.

On the other hand, it clarifies the provisions related to human trafficking and sexual exploitation. It creates a presumption regarding the exploitation of one person by another. Finally, it adds the offences of procuring and trafficking in persons to the list of offences to which the forfeiture of proceeds of crime apply.

I therefore encourage all of my colleagues to set aside partisanship and support this bill, which can save lives.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)