Evidence of meeting #32 for Justice and Human Rights in the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was prostitution.

A video is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Donald Piragoff  Senior Assistant Deputy Minister, Policy Sector, Department of Justice
Nathalie Levman  Counsel, Criminal Law Policy Section, Department of Justice

10:30 a.m.

NDP

Craig Scott NDP Toronto—Danforth, ON

No, infringed.

10:30 a.m.

Conservative

Peter MacKay Conservative Central Nova, NS

Well, that's your word.

10:30 a.m.

NDP

Craig Scott NDP Toronto—Danforth, ON

That's the way the charter works.

10:30 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Mike Wallace

Thank you very much.

Our final questioner for the minister is Ms. Ambler, who is joining the committee.

Thank you for coming. The time is yours.

10:30 a.m.

Conservative

Stella Ambler Conservative Mississauga South, ON

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Minister and officials, for joining us today. We appreciate your time.

My question, Minister, is about human trafficking. We all know that it's horrible. In fact, in the region I represent, it's a huge problem, because it's in the vicinity of the airport. This is something that most Canadians don't know much about and don't hear much about. I know this bill attempts to address it and to link the issues of prostitution and human trafficking.

Could you tell us more about the human trafficking component of the bill and how it will work?

10:30 a.m.

Conservative

Peter MacKay Conservative Central Nova, NS

Sure. Thank you very much, Ms. Ambler.

The amendments contained in Bill C-36, as I said my opening remarks, are meant to marry new sections of the Criminal Code with existing sections that deal with human trafficking. But you're absolutely right: there are many overlaps, if you will, particularly for vulnerable individuals and exploitative persons.

What we've attempted to do is ensure consistency with the human trafficking offences, which is very much related criminal conduct. Specifically, to answer your question, it would increase maximum penalties and impose mandatory minimum penalties for receiving a material benefit from human trafficking. Many of those who are trafficked are underage so there are already sections that apply, but regarding, for example, the withholding of documents for the purpose of committing child trafficking and the receipt of a material benefit from child trafficking, all of these types, shall we say, of collateral activities that need to be deterred will see increased maximum penalties under the bill.

What we're attempting to do here throughout this bill is to ensure greater protection for vulnerable Canadians. This is inherent in the bill. We have examined other jurisdictions that have decriminalized or legalized prostitution and found that higher rates of human trafficking and sexual exploitation have been the end result, and legalizing and regulating prostitution would create an increase in demand for those who provide sexual services.

That runs completely contrary to our intent to end the violence and exploitation that we think is inherent to prostitution, as I've said. It recognizes the societal harm that is caused by the commodification of sexual services. That is very much what we're attempting to do, to take these new sections and ensure they are consistent with the current provisions of the code.

10:35 a.m.

Conservative

Stella Ambler Conservative Mississauga South, ON

Thank you.

We'll be hearing from a number of witnesses, I think, who can speak to this issue and support what you said as well.

You mentioned other jurisdictions that are criminalizing the purchase but not the sale of sex. They follow an approach used in Sweden. I'm wondering if you can tell us if we know anything about the Swedish approach, and what the results have been of their legislative changes that were made in 1999.

10:35 a.m.

Conservative

Peter MacKay Conservative Central Nova, NS

The 1999 decision in Sweden that started a bit of a trend in this direction of decriminalizing the sale but criminalizing the purchase of sexual services was coupled in Sweden with the programming approach, the dual tracks of putting the emphasis on the perpetrators, on johns and pimps, and assisting vulnerable persons to exit the field of prostitution. I think—and I stand to be corrected—it was the first country to move, I don't want to say radically but, dramatically in that direction.

A report that was compiled in 2010, just a relatively short time later, found that implementation had been successful in reducing street prostitution as well as the rate of human trafficking. So there is a tried and true example, if you will, that is encouraging. The model also found it had a deterrent effect. By focusing resources, including police resources, on the perpetrators, on the purchasers, this is having an effect, anecdotally speaking. We may not have the empirical data we would hope to have in an ideal world.

Prostitution, as you know, is an underground activity. It's very difficult in many cases to get the type of specific statistics we need, but given its nature, the prevalence of other criminal elements—and we haven't really talked about that, the organized crime element that is very often associated with human trafficking—this has had a positive effect in Sweden. Recent research indicates that legalization or decriminalization of prostitution has the inverse effect, that going to either end of that spectrum in fact increases human trafficking in addition to prostitution.

10:35 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Mike Wallace

Thank you, Minister—

10:35 a.m.

Conservative

Peter MacKay Conservative Central Nova, NS

Based on that data, this is, again, supportive of the bill.

10:35 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Mike Wallace

Thank you, Minister, for joining us on our first panel, introducing Bill C-36 to us, and starting off the conversation that we'll be having all week. We appreciate your time.

I know that your officials are staying, but you are free to go.

10:35 a.m.

Conservative

Peter MacKay Conservative Central Nova, NS

Mr. Chair, I thank you again for your deliberations.

As well, I do have that technical paper available to this committee, should the committee wish to receive it.

10:35 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Mike Wallace

I'm assuming the committee would like to receive the technical paper? Yes?

10:35 a.m.

Some hon. members

Yes.

10:35 a.m.

Conservative

Peter MacKay Conservative Central Nova, NS

Okay.

10:35 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Mike Wallace

Please pass it out. The clerk will take it. Thank you very much.

We'll suspend for about three or four minutes until we change panels.

10:40 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Mike Wallace

I'll call this meeting back to order.

In our second panel, we have the officials from the Department of Justice. Mr. Piragoff was already introduced, as was Madam Levman. We are also joined by Ms. Morency, who is from the criminal law policy section.

Do you have an opening statement, or do you want to just go to questions?

Questions: there you go.

Members, we are here until 11:30. Just so you know, I do have to bring up an issue about the budget for the review of this legislation. I will save five minutes at the end today.

Our first questioner, from the NDP, is Madame Boivin.

10:40 a.m.

NDP

Françoise Boivin NDP Gatineau, QC

Thank you to all the witnesses for being here today.

Now I have some legal questions for you. I hope you're ready.

I want to discuss the Bedford decision. If I've understood correctly, the decision affects sections 197(1) and 210, as well as paragraphs 212(1)(j) and 213(1)(c). That means that the whole matter of human trafficking under sections 279 to 286 of the Criminal Code weren't mentioned in the Bedford decision at all. Is that correct?

July 7th, 2014 / 10:40 a.m.

Donald Piragoff Senior Assistant Deputy Minister, Policy Sector, Department of Justice

That's correct. The Bedford ruling only looked at three offences.

10:40 a.m.

NDP

Françoise Boivin NDP Gatineau, QC

Okay. So we're not talking of human trafficking here. We're talking solely of prostitution and what surrounds it.

10:40 a.m.

Senior Assistant Deputy Minister, Policy Sector, Department of Justice

Donald Piragoff

The Bedford decision, yes, that's what it looked at.

10:40 a.m.

NDP

Françoise Boivin NDP Gatineau, QC

Bill C-36 is supposed to respond to the Bedford ruling; hence the sense of urgency on the minister's part. Is that correct? I am just trying to put things into context to make sure we are all on the same page.

In Bedford, the Supreme Court ruled that the provisions I just mentioned jeopardize the health and safety of sex workers because they criminalize what those workers do and create a sense of insecurity and danger since they must carry out their activities in places that are out of sight.

That said, the minister is bound to respond to the Bedford ruling. What process did the department follow in ensuring that response? Did you examine different models, or rather, did you consider only one when you were drafting Bill C-36? Did you consider decriminalizing or legalizing these activities? Did you analyze the Nordic model? How exactly did you arrive at Bill C-36?

10:45 a.m.

Senior Assistant Deputy Minister, Policy Sector, Department of Justice

Donald Piragoff

We looked at a number of different models. The consultation paper, which was distributed in March, actually referred to three different approaches. They were general, but there were a lot of variations between them. Those three approaches were considered. Everything was looked at—from total abolition to total criminalization, as in some American states, to the Nordic model, to decriminalization models.

10:45 a.m.

NDP

Françoise Boivin NDP Gatineau, QC

Did you have legal advice for each type of model, based on the Bedford decision? Did you have, for instance...?

I don't know, but when I was more practising law on a day-to-day basis and a client would come to me and say, “Review the three models and advice to us”, I would review them and give suggestions.

Did that process happen, or...?

10:45 a.m.

Senior Assistant Deputy Minister, Policy Sector, Department of Justice

Donald Piragoff

When we provide options, we provide pros and cons of each option in terms of benefits and disadvantages. Policy decisions are made on the basis of the analysis.