Bill C-36 (Historical)

Protection of Communities and Exploited Persons Act

An Act to amend the Criminal Code in response to the Supreme Court of Canada decision in Attorney General of Canada v. Bedford and to make consequential amendments to other Acts

This enactment amends the Criminal Code to, among other things,
(a) create an offence that prohibits purchasing sexual services or communicating in any place for that purpose;
(b) create an offence that prohibits receiving a material benefit that derived from the commission of an offence referred to in paragraph (a);
(c) create an offence that prohibits the advertisement of sexual services offered for sale and to authorize the courts to order the seizure of materials containing such advertisements and their removal from the Internet;
(d) modernize the offence that prohibits the procurement of persons for the purpose of prostitution;
(e) create an offence that prohibits communicating — for the purpose of selling sexual services — in a public place, or in any place open to public view, that is or is next to a school ground, playground or daycare centre;
(f) ensure consistency between prostitution offences and the existing human trafficking offences; and
(g) specify that, for the purposes of certain offences, a weapon includes any thing used, designed to be use or intended for use in binding or tying up a person against their will.
The enactment also makes consequential amendments to other Acts.

[Suzanne Jay, Member, Asian Women Coalition Ending Prostitution]

Thank you and good morning. We appreciate the opportunity to include the perspectives of Asian women into the consideration of Bill C-36. We have also provided a brief.

The Asian Women Coalition Ending Prostitution has the goal of changing societal attitudes towards women, especially women of Asian descent. We work to advance equality for women and to create opportunities for Asian women to have meaningful participation and to take leadership roles in civil society. We see prostitution as a form of male violence against women that prevents women's equality and that encourages racist violence. We also believe that prostitution can be eradicated.

We're a feminist volunteer group. Our members have provided prostitution prevention education in the school system and legal advocacy to women involved in the live-in caregiver program. We've been front-line workers in feminist anti-violence centres. We've provided concrete aid and support to battered women and raped women, including prostituted women.

We were interveners in the Bedford case, where we provided a critical race analysis to help inform the Supreme Court's considerations.

I'll start by saying that we applaud the intent stated in the preamble setting protection of women's dignity and equality as an objective of the bill. This is consistent with the principle that all Canadian law is to be understood and interpreted in the context of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The bill's preamble demonstrates an understanding of the systemic nature of prostitution and the consequence of undermining women's equality on the basis of race, national or ethnic origin, colour, and sex.

We also appreciate that the bill acknowledges the danger that's inherent in prostitution and the profound exploitation done by the pimps, the brothel-keepers, the procurers, the advertisers, and the customers of prostitution to women, especially as it affects Asian and other racialized women. We recommend strengthening this acknowledgement by noting in the preamble the disproportionate impact of prostitution on racialized women.

We support the section of the bill that criminalizes advertising of sexual services because of the role that advertising plays in normalizing and entrenching racist and sexist stereotypes. For example, when we gathered online ads that were posted over a 24-hour period from the adult services section of the Vancouver Craigslist website, we found that 67% of the women advertised in the 1,472 ads we gathered were described or displayed by photo as Asian.

The Asian population of metro Vancouver is only 30%. It's reasonable to assume that Asian women comprise approximately 15% of that population but we're massively disproportionately overrepresented in that advertising. The advertising describes Asian women as providing a girlfriend experience. They're Japanese school girls, really young China dolls, Asian cuties, and they are paired with photos.

The pimps, procurers, brothel-keepers, advertisers, and others who are involved in the sales and marketing of prostituted women cater to these deeply racist demands. It's in their commercial interest to continue to normalize these stereotypes into Canadian society in order to grow the market for their product.

We experience negative consequences when our characteristics, whether they are real or imagined, are sexualized and commodified to promote sexual services. These stereotypes dehumanize and sexualize Asian women and they block our access to our Charter of Rights regardless of whether or not we are prostituted.

From our experience, prostitution overlaps with wife battering, rape, and incest. These are all acts of sexist violence that are usually committed by men in private venues, such as the home, where privacy is used to confine women, reinforce the attacker's authority, and hide the violence from public view. Being indoors does not increase women's safety from male violence in general. However, indoor venues such as Asian massage parlours do enhance safety for men. They shield the pimps, brothel-keepers, procurers, and customers from scrutiny and they hide the violence that's used to control women and the violence that is inherent to prostitution.

We support the tailored legislative approach offered by the bill. It accurately targets the men who are the source of the harm in prostitution.

We also appreciate that the bill differentiates between those who depend on a woman's income without caring about how it's earned. That includes dependent children, hairdressers, and other service providers. These people are very different from the people who are parasitically invested in having a woman enter and stay in prostitution. Those people include pimps posing as bodyguards, pimping boyfriends, brothel-keepers, and prostitution advertisers.

We also think it's important that the bill prevents these men from using a marriage licence or a family or other intimate relationship to escape criminal responsibility for their violence and exploitation.

We call for an amendment to remove the sections that criminalize communication in public areas because it undermines the objective of equality.

We agree that it's harmful for children and adults to observe a blatant act of racist and sexist exploitation, particularly in a situation where one feels they can't effectively intervene. However, it's more harmful for children and adults to observe or know that an exploited person will be punished by the state for their own exploitation. We'd much rather that they were offered the protection of the law and the charter.

Arresting and charging male customers and pimps—and not the women—will effectively address the harms caused by communication in a public place.

I'm now turning the mike over to Alice Lee, who is another member of our group, to talk about human trafficking.

[The Chair, Conservative, Mike Wallace]

I call this meeting of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights to order. This is meeting number 41 and we are televised. As per the orders of the day, as per the order of reference of Monday, June 16, 2014, we are dealing with Bill C-36, an act to amend the Criminal Code in response to the Supreme Court of Canada decision in Attorney General of Canada v. Bedford and to make consequential amendments to other acts.

We have a variety of witnesses here again this morning and I appreciate their coming. I will go through and introduce them. Each organization will have 10 minutes to present, and then we'll go to the rounds of questions.

First of all we have, from the Asian Women Coalition Ending Prostitution, Ms. Jay and Ms. Lee. From Hope for the Sold, we have Ms. Brock and Mr. Brock. From the Vancouver Rape Relief and Women's Shelter, we have Ms. Smith-Tague and Ms. Kerner. From the Aboriginal Legal Services of Toronto, we have Ms. Big Canoe. By video conference from Boston, Massachusetts, from u-r home, we have Ms. Pond.

With that, we will give the floor over to the Asian Women Coalition Ending Prostitution. You have 10 minutes to present. The floor is yours.

[Ève Péclet, NDP, La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC]

I have just a quick question for Sheri, if I may call you Sheri.

The first part of the question is, how does criminalizing the client help women you deal with every day get out of prostitution?

My second question is—and it's the same question I've asked everybody about the resources—do you think the existing laws.... Would it change something to adopt Bill C-36, or are there problems in the existing laws?

I don't have much time left so I'd like your comment on that.

[Pierre Jacob, NDP, Brome—Missisquoi, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I want to thank the witnesses here today and those participating via videoconference.

I will be sharing my time with my colleague Ève Péclet.

My first question is for Mr. Paterson.

In your opening remarks, you said Bill C-36 should be withdrawn because it was impossible to improve.

I'd like you to explain your main reasons for saying that.

[Ève Péclet, NDP, La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I want to begin by thanking Trisha, Larissa and Heather for sharing their stories with us today. It mustn't have been easy for you.

You're bringing a lot to the discussion today, and I wanted to thank you for that. I applaud you for having the courage to appear before the committee.

You talked about the exploitation, trafficking and violence women endure. But it's already an offence under the Criminal Code to exploit someone. In a nutshell, any situation that endangers a person's safety is considered a crime.

Human trafficking is also a crime under the Criminal Code. Anyone who is using assault, aggravated or otherwise, to control another person, or who is exerting physical or mental control over someone else would be sentenced to life in prison.

How would Bill C-36 enhance the existing provisions to punish these acts? It is truly unfortunate that you had to go through what you did, and I am deeply sorry for that.

How exactly does Bill C-36 differ from the current provisions making it a crime to exploit or traffic minors or adults?

[Stella Ambler, Conservative, Mississauga South, ON]

Under Bill C-36 someone who is involved in prostitution would be allowed to hire that safety and security person, a body guard. The bill does recognize the importance of that. I would say though—

Am I out of time?

[Larissa Crack]

I have to fully agree. Within the exiting strategies I used.... I went through a treatment program that had a police officer who treated the women with respect and who worked really hard at making these relationships. He became the middle person between the rest of the police force and the women, just creating these relationships.

It allowed women to talk to them and to open up. Women were more able to go through the court processes...for pimps and for their johns...when they had a police officer beside them who was supportive and understanding, and as she said, treating them like human beings and not criminals.

I think the government has made it clear. It's understood, within Bill C-36, that women are seen as exploited. So to turn around and criminalize people who are exploited doesn't make sense on any level.

[Joy Smith, Conservative, Kildonan—St. Paul, MB]

Finally we're getting the stories out, aren't we?

So why is Bill C-36 good? It's because it criminalizes the buyers of sex. There is the human right to be safe in this country. You brought up that wonderful thing that you give to the kids...you know, the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Everyone has a right to be safe in this country and that underlines this whole thing.

We've done an extensive consultation of Canadians, and without a doubt they are on the side of Bill C-36. What do you think when you come to Parliament and you hear this confusion and the muddlement? What do you think? What can we do to clear that confusion up so that we have all parliamentarians on side? This is not a perfect bill. No bill in its infancy is a perfect bill. I'm supporting it because I think it's a good start, not because I'm on the side of the government. I think it's a very good bill, and it does change the paradigms.

But how do we get this message clear about how important this is for the protection of women and children in this country? If December 19 comes along and we don't pass this bill, everything is legalized.

How do you feel about that?

[Joy Smith, Conservative, Kildonan—St. Paul, MB]

Thank you, Mr. Wallace.

First of all, I want to put the focus on all of you. That's what's important.

Jeanne and Linda, it's so good to meet you; we've dialogued for so long. It's amazing what you've done over so many years.

Trisha, you're my hero. You always have been. You've been through so much and you've helped so many people. You're a very brave woman.

Larissa and Heather, I say the same to you. I don't know how you got the money to get here today. I have to find out, because you were so worried that you didn't have the money to get here. I have to thank you for what you're doing.

Honestly, for the first time we have a bill in Canada that actually criminalizes the buying of sex. That is the first thing that's ever happened in Canada. The second thing is what Heather referred to, the changing of the paradigm. When I came to Parliament in 2004, they were telling me that there was no human trafficking, that there was no such thing, and that, hey, there were no underage people.

The ICE unit has been listening to this today. My son was in the ICE unit. They kept saying to keep talking about the kids, because the torturers get the most money with the kids.

The whole world is listening today. In Parliament, the whole world saw the NDP and the Liberals vote against Bill C-36, so they really believe what they're saying. What we're trying to do, though, is start a new paradigm in Canada where your voices are heard, where something is done. I'd like you to comment.

Perhaps I'll start with you, Larissa, because I've had a lot of dialogue with you and Heather. Can you tell me, in terms of criminalizing johns and the buying of sex, will that help in the safety of women, first of all?

[Françoise Boivin, NDP, Gatineau, QC]

My goodness, I don't know if it's the time, the fact that it's been three days into the hearing.…

First of all, I want to thank you all for your testimony, your experiences that you shared with the members of the committee. At the same time, I feel like I could pull my hair out.

I feel like we're hearing diametrically opposed views from groups on both sides I consider to be very feminist. There is agreement on a number of other issues.

That said, it's not that easy for us, the committee members, either, to sort all this out in our heads. On the one hand, we have one person telling us this is their occupation, and on the other, we have people telling us prostitution is a form of exploitation and goes hand in hand with violence. For every person who asks us to deregulate prostitution, another asks us to criminalize it, either wholly or partially.

As you can imagine, it's not straightforward. Perhaps the answer is crystal clear for some of you, but my 54 years on earth have taught me that very little in life is black and white.

I grew up with two solitudes. I used to think it was English and French. Now I'm convinced that it is prostitution, in a lot of aspects, because I don't know how we'll be able to end up reconciling all of these views. The bottom line is that we are trying to find the best solution.

What I was aiming at is that, for me, actions speak louder than words. We can talk until we die about equality and about the fact of respect. We can write it in the best charter we want but if, at the end of the day, the action does not follow then there is a big problem.

I will say to your panel, as I've said to other panels, that I find there is a lack of credibility with the law when I don't see what should be attached to it being attached to it. I see some of your groups saying to me—and pretty much everybody agrees that there are a couple of issues within the prostitution file where we seem to have an almost perfect agreement, except for the Conservatives—that the amount is definitely not sufficient. Pretty much everybody agrees with that. Thank God for that.

The fact that we should not criminalize sex workers—victims for some, workers for others—but that we should criminalize; we can find you all agreeing with that.

If we can't decriminalize completely, and remove those sections from the bill, my worry is that we have solved nothing.

My other worry is that if we don't attach what you so eloquently explained, Trisha, about your life and what happened and the life of your friends and what you've seen.... But when you said that you have to feed your kids or be in prostitution, my only question at the end of this week is: If Bill C-36 is passed, what will the person who has to answer that question do? It won't miraculously stop overnight, definitely not with $20 million, so what do you answer to that?

For your ladies who talked about torture, I so—

You have my heartfelt solidarity.

But are you telling us that the Criminal Code doesn't already cover it and that people who inflict torture can't be charged for it?

As I see it, torture is already covered by the Criminal Code. Torture in any form is not accepted in Canada. So there's a problem somewhere.

I was glad, Mr. Paterson, that you made the point that the Supreme Court of Canada did not say that we had to do something by December. It said that these three sections in the Criminal Code were invalid, but they are giving us a year before it comes into effect. If we want to do something then, do it, but we'd better do it in a way that doesn't put the lives of people in danger.

Maybe it's a lot of rambling, but we've heard a lot. I feel for you and I feel as if people are trying to push us on one side versus the other. There is no one side or the other. There is one side; it's called equality. If we believe in it we have to change a lot of things in Canada and it's not Bill C-36 that will change anything.

I don't know if anybody wants to.... I see Heather nodding. Maybe you can comment with the few minutes I left you. I'm so sorry.

[Sheri Kiselbach]

Okay, can you bear with me for about three short paragraphs?

I'm not going to summarize Bill C-36. That's already been talked about quite a bit.

It's long been recognized that criminalization is not an effective deterrent to prostitution. Laws trying to stop true slavery or trafficking are getting mis-applied to sex workers, clients, and others involved in the sex industry. This exposes us to an increased risk of violence and denies us any protection against assault or access to medical, legal, and educational services. It denies us our human rights.

All laws should fit the actual needs, capacities, and circumstances of sex workers. Canada's continuing failure to decriminalize sex work means the federal government sanctions violence against sex workers and all facets of the industry.

We are strongly opposed to sex workers having to endure yet another failed experiment. Increased safety and dignity for Canadian sex workers must be at the centre of new legislation.

Sex work is work, and it should be treated as such. We will never truly gain equality, freedom, and dignity until the illegal status of our work is reversed. We deserve not only the right to choose how we make a living but also the right to be free from fear, mistreatment, and at the root of it all, free from the misconceptions that have long plagued the industry.

A quick note: my recommendation is decriminalization, as it views prostitution as a legitimate and necessary business. It allows sex workers control over their work and their work environment.

I had a few more things, but—

[Laura Dilley]

Thank you.

Thank you for inviting our organization to come before the committee today. The Providing Alternatives Counselling and Education Society, by, with, and for sex workers, provides peer-driven violence prevention and support services for sex workers in Vancouver, British Columbia. We're located in the Downtown Eastside neighbourhood and have been providing services for the past 20 years. We operate under a non-judgmental, asset-based, and harm reduction model that recognizes the human rights of sex workers—female, trans, and male. This approach is based on self-identified needs.

Our sex worker-driven approach reflects an international movement that includes groups, such as Maggie's, in Toronto; Stella, in Montreal; POWER, in Ottawa; and the Canadian Alliance for Sex Work Law Reform. This movement emerged in response to the discrimination, violence, and persecution that sex workers experience due to stigmatization, and laws criminalizing sex work and sex workers.

Since the beginning, this movement has sought to address the inequalities that sex workers experience under the law. Our organization was an intervenor in Bedford v. Canada. Our violence prevention coordinator, Sheri Kiselbach, who I will have the pleasure of introducing to you shortly, along with Pivot Legal Society and sex workers united against violence, had previously launched a parallel constitutional challenge of Canada's sex work laws.

While we met the Bedford decision with great joy, knowing, in the words of Valerie Scott, that sex workers have for the first time been recognized as persons under the law, we are steadfast in our opposition to Bill C-36. As the committee has heard from our sister sex worker organizations, legal advocacy groups, and researchers, Bill C-36 will recreate the devastating harms that sex workers have experienced under the laws that were struck down in the Bedford decision. In pushing sex workers into unsafe settings and undermining their ability to screen clients, Bill C-36 will create the conditions that will lead to more murdered and missing women.

We're not recommending any amendments to Bill C-36 because, in short, we believe that the legislation is fatally flawed. Echoing previous testimony by Pivot Legal, the British Columbia Civil Liberties Association, and others, it would not withstand a constitutional challenge. As we know from past experience, constitutional challenges take years to wind their way through the courts. Let me be clear. It is absolutely unacceptable that sex workers in our community and across Canada be subjected to untold violence due to laws that are unconstitutional.

We call upon the committee and the government to reject this bill in its entirety until the current laws expire in December. However, we acknowledge that the government is unlikely to do so. We, therefore, call upon the government to immediately refer Bill C-36 to the Supreme Court and publicly release all legal opinions that the government has solicited on the bill.

Given that the minister has publicly acknowledged that Bill C-36 will face a future constitutional challenge, the government should recognize the critical importance of expediting this legal process. After all, I cannot stress this enough. The government is obligated to pass laws that comply with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. If instead the government continues to pursue legislation that recreates conditions that perpetuate violence, then they will be inflicting structural violence on sex workers in Canada.

Now it's my pleasure to introduce Sheri Kiselbach, PACE's violence prevention coordinator. For more than 40 years, Ms. Kiselbach has been involved in the sex industry, first as a sex worker, and now as an advocate and educator. Ms. Kiselbach is a national expert in violence prevention among sex workers and has worked tirelessly to promote sex worker rights in Canada. Ms. Kiselbach's experiential knowledge, wisdom, and expertise are precisely what should have informed the legislative process, had the government been committed to advancing a bill that respects the human rights and dignity of sex workers.

[Larissa Crack, Co-founder, Northern Women's Connection]

As a survivor of sex trafficking and the co-founder of the Northern Women's Connection, which is a new grassroots agency that directly works with women who have experienced oppression, marginalization, and trauma as a direct result of the sex trade, I am in full support of Bill C-36.

The protection of communities and exploited persons act, Bill C-36, works to offer solutions to women and at the same time targets johns, pimps, and any other party who would benefit from the exploitation of vulnerable women, children, or boys and men.

The day that Bill C-36 was announced was a momentous day for women's rights and equality within Canada. For the first time, Canada has offered legislation that acknowledges the gender inequality and inherent violence that is aimed towards women within prostitution. Bill C-36 is Canada taking a stand and demanding that women are treated with the respect and dignity they deserve, instead of being looked at as a nuisance. With slight amendments, such as fully removing the criminalization of women—this is expanded on in our brief—we are confident that Bill C-36 will be a solid platform for Canada.

As a survivor of child sexual exploitation, I was somewhat privileged in the fact that I was able to access the minimally available services and supports that women over the age of 19 are not allowed to access, or there are no services present in order to help them. I was 17 years old when I exited the sex trade. As a minor who had been involved, I was looked upon as a victim and a child incapable of having made the choice of entering the sex trade. If a few more years had passed, I would have turned from a victim to a willing participant. A few more years in the violent and forceful means that started and kept me in the sex trade would have been completely ignored in lieu of my new-found ability as an adult to make informed choices.

With the average age of entry into the sex trade, as stated by the John Howard Society, being between the ages of 14 and 16, how does a girl go from being a victim of exploitation to a woman capable of making decisions about her situation within the matter of a year? Bill C-36 recognizes that all women are exploited on one level or another, and therefore should all be able to access resources and services to aid them in exiting their situation.

Despite the pro-legalization lobby's attempt at discrediting Bill C-36 by making false claims and erroneous assertions—these include, but are not limited to, a man's right for paid sex, disabled men's need for paid sex, and a woman's right to sell sex—legalization and decriminalization would only create further harms for women.

The first two claims place a man's sexual desires as being more important than the inherent harm and distress caused to the woman in the same transaction. No person's sexual desires should be allowed to come before the protection and safety of another human being, including those who have disabilities or other factors that minimize their opportunities to have partnered sex.

The third claim, that a woman has the right to do what she wants with her body, to an extent is very true. But there comes a point where the able and willing must put their wants and desires to the side—when the majority of those involved in the sex trade are there completely through exploitative means. The small percentage of women, as stated by a study completed in 2014, who truly fit into this privileged category is no more than 10% of the population. This small subgroup of women within the sex trade should not override the needs that the other 90% of the population has, which is to be protected and free from criminalization.

Bill C-36 finally recognizes that the role of legislation is to protect those who are vulnerable, not to further the harms by advocating for the privileged minority through the fallacy of legalization. Despite the pro-legalization lobby's attempt at stopping Bill C-36, sexual transactions and the ability to perform sexual fantasies have never been, and will never be, either a mandatory part of sexual expression or a human right.

The Northern Women's Connection believes a shift in the thinking paradigm of Canadians in regard to the sex trade is very possible if educational services are put into place that would recognize prostitution as an oppression that relies on such structural barriers and inequalities as poverty, colonialism, racism, addiction, and lack of resources for women.

Violence has been, and always will be, associated with prostitution. This holds true for a large proportion of women involved in the sex trade who admit to experiencing abuse and violence as a direct result of the sex trade. It doesn't matter if women are given 2 seconds or 20 minutes to assess and screen the men looking to buy sex. When women are required to identify violent offenders, their immediate safety will be put at risk. Predators can be manipulative, charismatic, and smooth talkers; all of which would make it easy for them to move past any so-called safety practices put in place by sexually exploited women, and we cannot put this onto the backs of women who are placed in this position.

As a 17-year old first exiting the sex trade, I spent years healing from the trauma and abuses that occurred during my involvement. Early in my recovery, I was diagnosed with PTSD to the same extent as war veterans, due to a combination of prostitution itself and the violence that becomes a normal part of the overall experience.

I have been held at gunpoint and watched my friend get murdered in front of my eyes. I was tied down for days at a time and injected with numbing drugs while men paid to rape me. I was drugged. I've been beaten and thrown out of the vehicles of men who didn't want to pay for the service they had received and suffered multiple injuries from the pimps who wouldn't accept anything under a predetermined amount of revenue.

After all of these abuses that I have endured, the worst part is now living with and hearing others talk about the sex trade as if it were a choice, a form of employment that could become normalized if Bill C-36 is not passed, and constantly hearing that what I went through could have been prevented by having a bodyguard or by having the privilege of working inside.

I had a bodyguard, who made sure that I was always making an income, who enforced the rules that I was expected to live by, which often included ensuring I serviced violent and abusive men. I also often worked inside, which prevented social workers and police from even knowing that I was there and which gave a quiet, undisturbed place for me to get violated, abused, and raped without anyone ever knowing that it was happening.

Hearing these lies and knowing the truth about the inherent violence involved in the sex trade is a form of exclusion that continues to victimize and marginalize the hundreds of women I have known and worked with over the past 10 years who have stories similar to mine.

Pro-legalization lobbies have put forth a large amount of energy and resources in the hopes of swaying the general public. These extreme measures are not surprising, considering the large amount of profit that the sex industry stands to lose if Bill C-36 becomes a reality.

Supporters of Bill C-36 stand firm in their position due to understanding the need to support and protect women while criminalizing those who are at the heart of the problem, while the pro-legalization lobby stands firmly behind profit margins without considering the human cost associated with it.

[Heather Dukes, Co-founder, Northern Women's Connection]

First of all, we would like to say that it's an honour to be here today in front of all of you. Thank you for granting us the opportunity to communicate on the importance of Bill C-36, being passed as the Canadian model.

The Northern Women's Connection believes that Bill C-36 is an excellent piece of legislation. It provides protection to women who are manipulated, coerced, and threatened into the sex trade. It will allow women to finally have the opportunity to learn that there may be a chance to exit this vicious cycle of violent sexual abuse.

When women learn that predators are criminalized, they will gain personal power and the ability to direct that power toward the very people who are profiting from their sexual services, financially, sexually, or for other unmentioned illegal returns.

Many women, including me, have worked hard to never have to use sex in order to survive and meet basic daily needs again. This is often difficult for women who are plagued with barriers in our society, such as housing, child care, precarious employment, and low accessibility to service due to being located in northern Ontario.

At six years of age, I was placed in the care of a 16-year-old male, who had the free will to treat me like his sexual object. I was also raped of my entire childhood, and my perceptions of life were damaged. I came to believe that it was the norm for young girls to engage in sexual behaviour.

This personal and systematic belief system, which is common among sexually exploited women, creates a structure that forces women to engage in precarious sexual activity in order to meet basic needs. After 20 years of addictions, and caressed with faces of death several times, I knew I had hit a place of complete demoralization. I came to a place where I had to surrender to finally receive professional help. I had to change my entire life.

Fortunately, I live in a country that has provided me with services for rehabilitation. The services I personally used, which are vital services for women who have experienced trauma, are mental health wards in local hospitals, withdrawal management centres, detox, treatment centres, and addiction counselling. I participated weekly in sexual assault counselling. However, I was not offered any tailored services in order to restore a healthy sexual life. I suffered daily about my past sexual behaviour.

The $20 million that has been offered through Bill C-36 will help create services that will specifically support the diverse needs of sexually exploited women. It was not until after I began attending Algoma University and was receiving an education for a degree in social work, that I finally realized that this was a common issue and that I was not alone.

The Northern Women's Connection is asking all members of Parliament to pass Bill C-36, so women can finally start receiving the help they need to change their entire lives, without ever believing that they are alone. In northern Ontario, we're going to need funds for education and reintegration.

Thank you.

[Trisha Baptie]

My name is Trisha Baptie, and I want to thank you for inviting me to be a part of this process. I would also like to acknowledge the Algonquin peoples, who are the traditional caretakers of the land on which we stand.

I am here today as a representative of an organization called EVE, former Exploited Voices Now Educating. We are a volunteer, non-governmental, non-profit organization comprising former sex industry women. Our mandate is to have prostitution recognized as a form of violence against women, driven by the demand for paid sex. We seek the abolition of paid sexual access to women's and children's bodies, and participate in political action, advocacy, and public education campaigning in order to pursue this goal.

EVE operates under a feminist model, acknowledging that prostitution is born out of sexism, classism, racism, poverty, and other forms of systemic oppression. Since EVE was established in 2008, members have worked alongside of a wide cross-section of groups—feminists, grassroots, academics, aboriginals, faith-based/community-based groups, and government officials—to advocate for the criminalization of the demand for paid sex, and the decriminalization of persons selling sex.

I am not only here because of my group's vested interest in this topic, but also because I have a 15-year history in prostitution. I was prostituted from the age of 13 to the age of 28. The last 10 of those years were in Vancouver's notorious Downtown Eastside, the Downtown Eastside where I made many of my dearest friends, some of whom I would lose to Robert Pickton.

I entered prostitution when I was in my first group home after I was signed over to government care. I didn't call it prostitution at the time. I had no cognition that what I was experiencing was prostitution. I knew it was some form of inequality, as I was forced into the situation by a lack of alternatives. But no one stood up for me, no one told me that what was being done to me was not okay, and especially no one stood up to the men and said to them that they were breaking the law.

I had no idea at 13 years old I would be trapped in that world for the next 15 years, working indoors and outdoors, working licensed and unlicensed, preferring the streets of Vancouver's Downtown Eastside to working for someone else and giving my money away. At no point in time did I consent to the abuse I suffered. Consent was not freely given. It was bypassed because johns had the money I needed to keep myself and my family alive. Like so many other women and girls who find themselves in that circumstance, the choice of prostitute was one made under severe constraint. It was a choice between whether my kids would go hungry, or not. To me at that time there was no choice at all.

Money does not equal consent. It temporarily alleviates a dire need, the need to feed children, the need to feed addictions, the need to pay rent. Whatever the reasons, we had to be out there. Men took advantage of that desperation for their own sexual gratification, and used money to appease their guilt.

When Bill C-36 was released, I was encouraged when I read the first section of the summary that dealt with this exact behaviour. As a former prostitute, I'm aware that not every man is violent, but the threat of violence was ubiquitous in the sex industry, as it was impossible to discern which johns would attempt to cause physical harm, and when they might choose to do so. I feel justified in using gender language in this when I discuss my experiences because in 15 years of prostitution I was never bought by a woman.

We were particularly encouraged that the preamble of the bill contained statements like concerns about the exploitation that is inherent in prostitution, and the risk of violence, as well as recognizing the social harm caused by the objectification of the human body and the commodification of sexual activity. These statements are consistent with our experiences in prostitution. These words acknowledge that prostitution is a system based on inequality.

I want to make it very clear that it was never the laws that beat and raped and killed me and my friends, it was men. It was never the location we were in that was unsafe, it was the men we were in that location with who made it unsafe. We are glad to see that this behaviour will no longer be tolerated.

Some people want to make prostitution safer, but I know, we know, that you can't tell whether someone is a violent john until he deals out the first blow. This is true of unfamiliar johns as well as regulars. The claim that a prolonged screening time with potential buyers will protect women from physical harm allows society to wash its hands of the responsibility to take care of the most vulnerable and marginalized. What we demand is not safer, but safe.

The ban on the purchase of sexual services is an integral part of a movement towards real safety for women in Canadian communities. This is how we truly keep prostitute women safe. We do not allow men to buy them.

This policy sets a new tone for Canadians in how men treat and regard women. Canada, in passing this legislation, will be setting a standard for how men treat women. It will create a new social fabric for our young people to stand on, one that clearly says women and our girls are not for sale.

If we stand in agreement with prostitution we reinforce male privilege. We would effectively be saying that we will always have a demographic of women who will be offered up for sale. That notion contradicts the statements in the preamble of this bill that correctly note that prostitution disproportionately impacts women and children, particularly women and children of colour.

We do have concerns about this bill. We believe that section 213, the communicating provision, is redundant, as the culpable party—the sex buyers—would already receive criminal sanction. If, in fact, the government wants to encourage those who engage in prostitution to report incidents of violence and to leave prostitution, as stated in the preamble, the sellers of sex should face no fear of criminalization at all. A criminal record is a barrier to exiting from prostitution as it limits the ability for people in the sex industry to gain employment elsewhere.

We also fear this provision could cause prostituted women to be unduly targeted by their community, reducing them again to the category of public nuisance rather than human being.

In regard to the $20 million, we recognize this is a great start towards combatting prostitution, but we are very aware of how much this is just a drop in the bucket. We need funds dedicated to helping women exit prostitution, help support women until they feel they are able to make the transition to leave, as well retraining of the police about how to implement the new prostitution laws. We also need funds to do public education so the public can understand the changes made to the laws and explain how Canada is on a new trajectory for ending this form of abuse.

We resist the notion that men should be allowed to have sex exclusively on their terms at all times. We need to uphold the idea that mutual desire, comfort, and safety are a requisite component of sexual encounters. Anything short of this reinforces rape culture. For when men pay for sex, it is all about them, and has nothing to do with the person inside the body they are abusing.

We anticipate this law will have a normative function. Rather than give men free rein to ask women if they are for sale, rebrand pimps as businessmen, and attract organized crime, we will send a message that we value the women in our country and will not tolerate this gender violence.

If we want to build strong, safe, happy, and vibrant communities, we must put an end to this form of abuse and injustice. We rally to change male behaviour rather than accept women's subjugation. This subjugation causes physical, emotional, and mental harm for individual women and women collectively. A safe community for one and all is one that does not have prostitution.