Justice Committee on July 9th, 2014

[Chief Eric Jolliffe]

I would suggest that they're not totally sufficient and that there needs to be more opportunity for folks to avail themselves of the services that are needed to support those with addictions and mental health problems. We see that in our industry every day of the week.

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

Thank you, Mr. Jolliffe.

You also discussed the $20-million investment the government plans to make over 5 years. Do you think spending $20 million over a period of 5 years, for the entire country, demonstrates that the government is serious about doing something?

[Chief Eric Jolliffe]

I'm looking from a positive perspective here at the fact that it's a start. I'm not sure, quite frankly, if it is enough. That's why I said in my comments that it's a good start. I think that once there's some further evaluation of the possible usage, then one would have a better idea what would be probably the most appropriate dollar value to put to that.

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

Thank you, Mr. Jolliffe.

My next question is for Ms. Scott and Ms. Lebovitch.

What I gather from your remarks is that Bill C-36 is very flawed, because it doesn't satisfy the criteria set out by the Supreme Court in Bedford and that it won't make women any safer.

My question is this. How relevant would affordable housing and poverty reduction measures be in terms of helping sex workers get out of prostitution?

[Amy Lebovitch]

She's having trouble hearing. The question was around how poverty and affordable housing will allow for sex workers to leave the business.

I think that addressing poverty and affordable housing should be what we should do for everyone in Canada. It's an issue that a lot of Canadians face.

If I can just say, in regard to New Zealand, there are, in place in the model, occupational health and safety guidelines and provisions against exploitation. It's right in the New Zealand model, against youth and sex work, around business licensing, but not individual licensing for sex workers. So I just wanted to add that in.

But I think poverty and affordable housing is something that we all need to address for all Canadians.

[Valerie Scott]

I agree. I don't think that any one particular group should be singled out. I think Canada could really do a better job on that, in my opinion.

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

Very well.

You mentioned the New Zealand model. What direct repercussions will Bill C-36 have on your day-to-day life?

[Amy Lebovitch]

He is talking about how Bill C-36 will impact sex workers' lives. I sort of mentioned in my talk that for those working on the street, when you target our clients it puts us in danger. We see that in Vancouver and we see that where it has been done. It's a way of pushing us further away from our communities, away from the services that we need.

As I mentioned, clients are paranoid of the police and will go into areas that are out of the way, and that's where we have to go, right?

For indoor workers...very concerned about the advertising. We see in the U.S. that sites are closing down. We're not able to advertise. Then again, for indoors, our clients are targeted.

In Sweden we see that they get information on the clients by going to areas where sex workers are working out of their homes or hotels, and they watch those hotels to see when clients are coming. So we are afraid of that.

[Valerie Scott]

As in any business, we go where our clients are. When you force us into dark, industrial zones, as what happened in Vancouver—and those were also known as Robert Pickton's killing fields—this will happen to us here again with this bill. I can see it.

I am also old enough to know how this works when you have this kind of criminalization. The way brothels used to work prior to the 1978 Hutt decision, the mob pretty much ran things unless you were lucky enough to live in Halifax, where Ada McCallum, a well-known madam, ran several satellite brothels throughout Halifax and Dartmouth. Working with Ada was okay.

But in Toronto and Montreal and Vancouver, brothels were primarily owned by guys with muscle who could pay the police off, and word of mouth is how the advertising had to be.

So we need to go where the clients go and you end up working up in one of those brothels, very underground.

[The Chair, Conservative, Mike Wallace]

Thank you for those questions and for the answers from the witnesses.

Our next questioner is Monsieur Goguen, from the Conservative Party.

[Robert Goguen, Conservative, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to all the witnesses for your testimony. It's certainly very diverse and it will be helpful in our deliberations.

Of course, Mrs. Grant, as the other members said, certainly the best of luck in rejoining your beloved daughter.

I want to address my questions to Mrs. Ekberg. Your testimony has been long awaited, as the author of the Nordic model, of course. As you know, Bill C-36 has taken a number of the elements from the Nordic model, particularly targeting the pimps and the johns in the criminalization.

I trust that as the author of this model you've followed its results on the prostitution industry afterwards in Sweden?

[Gunilla Ekberg]

Sorry, but I didn't hear the last part. You trust that...?

[Robert Goguen, Conservative, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

I said that I trust you followed the results of what the Nordic model has done in Sweden after it was implemented.

[Gunilla Ekberg]

That's right.

In 2008 a special inquiry was put in place, chaired by the Chancellor of Justice, looking at the effects.

[Robert Goguen, Conservative, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

May I ask you a couple of specific questions because we're short of time? I want to focus on a couple of things. I know you've studied it.

What effect did the Nordic model have once it was implemented on prostitution? Was there an increase, a decrease in prostitution? Was there an increase, a decrease in human trafficking? What results did it have and on what do you base those statements?

[Gunilla Ekberg]

The inquiry did a comparative study between Sweden, Norway, and Denmark. At the time, Norway did not have the provisions that criminalized the buyers; nor had they the more comprehensive approach that Sweden took. In Denmark, the approach is to not implement the legislation, which is still on the books, so it's a tolerance model.

What they concluded, on all the questions you asked me, was that the number of individuals in prostitution had dramatically gone down, in particular in comparison with countries that did not have our approach. Specifically, the country that had the largest number of victims was Denmark, as a percentage of their population, because of the fact that they have.... If I look out the window here, I see night clubs, and in reality, in Denmark there is a very viable prostitution industry, which we do not have in Sweden.

The national rapporteur on trafficking, which we've had since 1998, concluded a long time ago, and the special inquiry concurred with her conclusions, that having legislation and vigorously enforcing it against both the prostitution buyers, the pimps, and the traffickers, makes a country less attractive.

This was doubted by German and Dutch police, but they have recently, in the last two years, turned to the Swedish police to ask how we managed to keep the involvement of organized crime down, whereas in Germany and the Netherlands there is now, I would say, a catastrophic situation. Just this Monday, the appeal court in the province of Utrecht affirmed a decision to close down the whole prostitution district of Utrecht's 143 brothels because of organized crime involvement. So whereas we have a diminution of numbers in the country, in the other countries it is going up.That is based on facts, not hollow arguments.

[Robert Goguen, Conservative, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

In summary, it has greatly diminished the level of prostitution and human trafficking as a result of its implementation; that is what I take the succinct answer to be. Is that correct?

[Gunilla Ekberg]

That's correct. But I also want to say that in the 16 years that we've been doing this, we have not been able, of course, to eliminate prostitution and human trafficking completely. Also, I want to add—

I'm sorry...?

[Robert Goguen, Conservative, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

That's fair enough.

What about the issue of violence? There was always a question about the level of violence. Some of the witnesses here have said that targeting the johns will drive the prostitutes further underground and make their profession more dangerous.

Was there an increase in the amount of violence with prostitutes as a result of the implementation of the Nordic model? Did you see any result whatsoever, good, bad, or otherwise, from the point of view of violence?

[Gunilla Ekberg]

Let me look at both the underground and violence. First of all, “underground” is not a place. It's impossible for prostitution to go underground. In order for buyers to be in contact with those they want to purchase in prostitution, there needs to be a communication.

That can be through advertisements; it can be online; it can be in the newspapers, as was shown by the Adult Entertainment Association of Canada. There are different methods of making contact. As much as the buyers can get in contact with the women or the men who are in prostitution, so can the police, and the Swedish police have spent the past many years doing investigations online on websites that advertise the sale of women and their purchase by men in Sweden.

[Robert Goguen, Conservative, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

And violence...?

[Gunilla Ekberg]

Violence was also included in the special inquiry. But also, if you talk with women who have experience in prostitution in Sweden who are not related to the prostitution industry, they will tell you that the prostitution industry as such is a very violent place to be, and there is no correlation between the lesser number of men and increased violence, because men who are violent.... The prostitution act is a violent act in itself—the use of women, sexual violence—but there is also no guarantee that those who have stopped buying are less violent than those who are in the industry.

The special inquiry had consultations with women and men with experience in prostitution, who clearly declined.... I'd be happy to give you a copy of the document, if you would like to read it yourself.

[The Chair, Conservative, Mike Wallace]

Thank you very much. Thank you for those questions and answers.

Our next questioner, from the New Democratic Party, is Madame Péclet.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to all the witnesses for their remarks. I am going to proceed quickly, because, as you know, we don't have much time.

My first question is for Ms. Ekberg.

I think it's important to point out that the Nordic model should actually be referred to as the Swedish model. Finland, Denmark and a number of other countries in northern Europe haven't adopted the exact same model as Sweden.

Sweden opted for a model that criminalizes the individual procuring the sexual services. It's important to keep in mind, however, that, along with the legislative component, Sweden also adopted an array of very significant social measures. This type of model is doomed to fail if authorities lack the resources needed to help victims get out of their situations, as claimed.

I'd like you to comment on two things. First, we're considering a bill that deviates from the so-called Nordic model because it still criminalizes women. That's what you talked about in your opening statement. Second, the government isn't introducing any social measures to complement the bill, as Sweden did when it passed its legislation in 1999.

Can all the figures being discussed here really be applied to the context of Bill C-36? I have my doubts.

[Gunilla Ekberg]

It is true that Sweden has a more comprehensive approach than other countries, mainly because our focus on this started 10 years before the other two countries in Scandinavia that have done it. But if you look at other countries in Europe that are now considering having a similar system, which is actually not a criminalization system because women are not criminalized, and that's key to us, but the perpetrators are, and so they should be....

If you look at the French bill that is now pending in the senate, and this is a bigger country than Canada with a lot of social problems and financial and economic budgetary difficulties that are, I would argue, bigger than here, they have still decided that they're going to pass legislation very similar to ours with social measures, etc.

I think the model is applicable everywhere, but as I said in the response to one of your colleagues, it is necessary to make the implementation of such a model a political priority. That political priority should, as you rightly pointed out, also include measures that ensure that victims have access to viable exit programs, but also long term.