Justice Committee on July 7th, 2014

[Donald Piragoff]

That is why the bill immunizes...and says that the seller of sex will not be prosecuted—

[Françoise Boivin, NDP, Gatineau, QC]

He continues, and it makes me continue.

[The Chair, Conservative, Mike Wallace]

Okay, thank you very much.

Our next questioner is Mr. Brown, from the Conservative Party.

[Patrick Brown, Conservative, Barrie, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

My first question is in regard to some groups who have argued that in prohibiting advertising of sexual services, you are not allowing prostitutes the opportunity to screen their clients.

Could you comment on that concern?

[Nathalie Levman, Counsel, Criminal Law Policy Section, Department of Justice]

The advertising offence prohibits advertising the sale of sexual services, but if you look at proposed section 286.5, it proposes an immunity for the sellers of sexual services. So to the extent that a person puts an ad up advertising their own sexual services, they are immunized from prosecution by the bill explicitly.

[Patrick Brown, Conservative, Barrie, ON]

I have an additional question. There has been some confusion over what would apply in the case of those under 18, but I understand that it would be the Youth Criminal Justice Act provisions that would hold forth here. Can you comment on those under the age of 18 and if the latter would be the superceding document? Would it be the Youth Criminal Justice Act that governs any interactions that involve someone under the age of 18?

[Nathalie Levman]

Yes.

[Patrick Brown, Conservative, Barrie, ON]

Additionally, going back to the advertisement of sexual services, are there any studies that would complement that view, any evidence that the Department of Justice has found, for example, to show that in jurisdictions where prostitution has been completely legalized there has been an increase in human trafficking?

[Nathalie Levman]

Yes, there is evidence that indicates that.

Sorry, what's the link to the advertising?

[Patrick Brown, Conservative, Barrie, ON]

The link it that there's no model that can ever make prostitution a safe activity, but I thought it might be relevant to this committee to share some of the studies that have been done in jurisdictions where prostitution has been completely legalized.

[Nathalie Levman]

I would recommend that you all take a look at the technical paper that the minister just tabled. All of the research is referenced in that paper in the end notes, as well as in annex B, which is a bibliography. There is evidence that speaks to the experience of New Zealand, which decriminalized prostitution. I believe they put restrictions on advertising, but in a regulatory context as opposed to a criminal context.

[The Chair, Conservative, Mike Wallace]

Are those studies that are mentioned in the bibliography and footnotes of the technical paper we just received available through the Internet?

[Nathalie Levman]

We've provided links where links were available, and full references in order for them to be found.

[The Chair, Conservative, Mike Wallace]

Thank you. I inquired because a member of the committee asked me whether any studies that are mentioned could be brought forward. But they're actually inside that technical paper, the references to them?

[Nathalie Levman]

Yes, they aren't reproduced in full, or else it would be a lot bigger. But yes, all of the references are there.

[The Chair, Conservative, Mike Wallace]

Thank you.

The time is still yours, Mr. Brown.

[Patrick Brown, Conservative, Barrie, ON]

Actually, that covers my two questions. Bob has a....

[The Chair, Conservative, Mike Wallace]

Thank you very much.

You want to share his time?

[Bob Dechert, Conservative, Mississauga—Erindale, ON]

To either Mr. Piragoff or Ms. Levman, on this question of advertising, a number of commentators have got it wrong. I know there are some journalists in the room today who got it wrong in their columns. They made statements like, because this bill makes it illegal to have any form of advertising, they're going to force prostitutes out into the street to advertise their services and, therefore, the bill is unconstitutional.

You pointed out 286.2(4)b), which says that someone can provide their own advertising for their own services and can pay someone on commercial terms to help them with that. That clearly allows the individual to offer their own sexual services. There seems to be some concern about what the advertisement can say. For certain types of advertisements, the prosecutor can apply to the court to have those advertisements removed if they define sexual services in a certain way.

I've taken a look at some of these advertisements, and anyone who has access to the Internet can see them, and typically what they say is rather sad, rather degrading. It says sometimes the person's name, their age, their ethnicity, their hair colour, their eye colour, their bust size, their waist size, their height, and certain other physical characteristics. Then it will give an hourly rate, i.e. so much for half an hour, so much for two hours. If that ad runs, as it does today—you can find it online in many places and in many newspapers across Canada—is that something that would be caught by the provisions of Bill C-36?

[Nathalie Levman]

You're absolutely right that it's very rare to see an explicit ad.

[Bob Dechert, Conservative, Mississauga—Erindale, ON]

That's a laundry list.

[Nathalie Levman]

I would refer you to the general principles of criminal law that require proof beyond reasonable doubt. So a crown would have to prove beyond reasonable doubt that a particular advertisement was an advertisement for the sale of sexual services.

[Bob Dechert, Conservative, Mississauga—Erindale, ON]

Right. I think a lot of people are misunderstanding this. They're saying that this is a total ban on advertising. But as I read it, what's going on today, whereby an individual, if he or she is paying for that ad themselves, if everyone involved is only receiving a material benefit that's commensurate with the services provided on reasonable commercial terms, you can say my name is X. I'm available for a certain price per hour or hourly rate—I can say that—and that's probably not the type of thing that's going to be made illegal by Bill C-36. Would you agree with that?

[Nathalie Levman]

The person who takes out that ad, as long as it relates only to their own sexual services, is immunized from prosecution, which I would note is different from allowing prostitution. In no way does Bill C-36 attempt to allow the practice of prostitution. It merely immunizes from prosecution certain types of behaviour that are frequently engaged in by the persons who are considered to be exploited by the practice of prostitution.

[Bob Dechert, Conservative, Mississauga—Erindale, ON]

Okay, thank you.