Justice Committee on July 9th, 2014

[Françoise Boivin, NDP, Gatineau, QC]

So you couldn't go after johns before, is that what you're saying to me?

[Chief Eric Jolliffe]

Well, one thing for us, when the Supreme Court had come up with their final decision, we began to focus much more of our attention on the pimp. This allows us—

[Françoise Boivin, NDP, Gatineau, QC]

I'm trying to understand. You haven't gone after the prostitutes in the last five years, and you're talking about the Bedford decision in December 2013 and that now you can focus more on the johns. So who did you focus on?

[Chief Eric Jolliffe]

The job is complex. We are trying to inculcate ourselves into this business to determine, basically, if people are being exploited. This takes an enormous amount of time and we need tools to be able to make this happen.

Material benefit, for example, is important for us to see. The advertising business is helpful for us also, to give us the grounds or the ability, once we think that we are onto something, to be able to separate parties.

[Françoise Boivin, NDP, Gatineau, QC]

Can you explain to me how this bill is going to help your job? I'm not setting you up. I just want to know actually what new part of the advertisement.... Is it the link to Bill C-13, that fact that you'll be able to obtain some mandat de surveiller? What is it? What tool exactly is helping you out, from your understanding of the bill?

[Chief Eric Jolliffe]

We have many laws in the Criminal Code. When it deals with investigating prostitution and human trafficking matters many of the offences that are in the code right now I would consider as reactive tools. An assault has occurred, we get called to deal with the matter. Some of these additional items here—

[Françoise Boivin, NDP, Gatineau, QC]

Like what...? That's what I'm trying to see.

[Chief Eric Jolliffe]

We have commodification of sexual activity, presumption of financial benefit, procuring, and advertising. We're able to look at each of those things in their individual subset and determine if there are activities going on around that.

[Françoise Boivin, NDP, Gatineau, QC]

You couldn't do that before?

[Chief Eric Jolliffe]

We could do that before, but this gives us some more authorities to continue on.

[Françoise Boivin, NDP, Gatineau, QC]

In what aspect...?

[Chief Eric Jolliffe]

It just provides us with the further tools to do the job.

[Françoise Boivin, NDP, Gatineau, QC]

Okay, I'll take this as the answer.

The ladies from the Sex Professionals of Canada—I think it was Ms. Lebovitch who talked about this—we hear a lot about the Nordic model. We heard a bit from other groups that it was the New Zealand model. What the hell is the New Zealand model? I meant, “the heck”, I'm sorry.

[Amy Lebovitch]

It's a model that supports sex workers' rights under labour and health regulations. It would allow sex workers to work together. It affords sex workers the same rights as other workers.

[Françoise Boivin, NDP, Gatineau, QC]

Does the New Zealand model condone sexual assault, people who are not consensual? Are there other laws that surround it?

[Amy Lebovitch]

No. In fact, despite what we have been hearing, trafficking and prostitution are not the same thing. New Zealand is a tier one country, the highest, I'm told, as far as combatting trafficking is concerned.

[Françoise Boivin, NDP, Gatineau, QC]

When you say prostitution is not trafficking, you will agree, though, that sometimes prostitution can be part of trafficking.

[Amy Lebovitch]

I don't know if I understand the question.

I guess what I'm saying is that prostitution is not a violent activity. There can be things that—

[Françoise Boivin, NDP, Gatineau, QC]

I meant it could be included. It's not equating, but there are cases, just to be fair.

[Amy Lebovitch]

Yes.

[Françoise Boivin, NDP, Gatineau, QC]

My last question, really quickly, is for the Adult Entertainment Association. How do you define this? I'm still trying to find out what “sexual services” means in this bill. Nobody is really defining it for me. The minister couldn't. How do you perceive it in the Adult Entertainment Association? Does it cover your business?

[Tim Lambrinos]

No.

What we have defined as “sexual services” was created by a lawyer called Theresa Simone—and it's not the Bill Clinton definition of sex. If you want me to say the terms I know, it would be actual or simulated intercourse, oral intercourse, masturbation, urination, defecation, and torture in the context of a sexual activity. There's a long list of very poignant, detailed things, and it defines sexual activity.

My statement to you, Madame Boivin, was that it's ambiguous. It always has been a grey area in terms of the advertising. They don't advertise for any of that. They use codes. Sometimes they use acronyms. The legislation, itself, does not even define what that may be, and there's a grey area. Does it mean the Bill Clinton definition, for example? It could mean that. So it needs to be defined, for one thing.

[The Chair, Conservative, Mike Wallace]

Thank you very much for those questions and answers.

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

[David Wilks, Conservative, Kootenay—Columbia, BC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I thank the witnesses for being here today.

Before I start I just want to thank Ms. Grant for being here today. It's a difficult position that you're in, and I hope your daughter comes home.

I also wanted to say that having been involved in police work for some time and having been involved with next of kin, I wouldn't wish that on anyone in this room. It's a terrible thing.

One of the ones I was involved with was Angela Jardine, who was one of the victims of Willie Pickton. Her parents still live in my home town of Sparwood, British Columbia. They still struggle to this day, but they have closure. So it is a challenge.

Chief Jolliffe, I want to ask you a few questions with regard to police procedure and some of the questions my colleague Ms. Boivin was asking.

Part of the sections in the code as they exist today, specific to subsection 213(1), the “Offence in relation to prostitution”, as it's stated, “Definition of 'public place'”, provides the police with opportunity to deal with those on the street in many different ways.

Certainly the police have at their disposal a word called “discretion”, which they use more often than not. I would suggest from your testimony, in which you said that you have not charged anyone in the last five years under section 213, that your officers have used a lot of discretion. I wonder if you could explain to us, from the perspective of police work, the discretion that is used and how it is used.

[Chief Eric Jolliffe]

Thank you.

Police officers do have the discretion to lay charges. Although that discretion is not absolute, we do have the ability to decide, based on factors, if we wish to move forward with arrest and charge or not. In this particular case, we use the power of sections in the Criminal Code to inculcate ourselves into what's going on and to extricate individuals who are involved in the trade to be able to have this conversation about what is going on, if they are comfortable in what they are doing, whether they are doing it of their free will, and so on. What that does is to lead us to what we see as more important things. It leads us to pimps. It leads us to the human trafficking charges that are far more important for us to get to.

Based on that process, we will choose to use discretion to gain the trust and confidence of workers so they feel comfortable enough speaking to us and sharing what is really going on in their lives, so we have the ability to extract if required or at least point them in a direction for treatment or services.