Justice Committee on July 10th, 2014

[Stella Ambler, Conservative, Mississauga South, ON]

And so when you hear the other stories here that we've heard this week, do you tell yourself those are rare and it's just as likely that the guy at the corner store's going to be murdered than someone who's a prostitute? How do you suggest that we as a government protect women who are not in this life by choice?

[Natasha Potvin]

I think that assistance for individuals has to be enhanced. The $20-million amount is not enough to help all the provinces.

We already have legislation on human trafficking and minors. I think that assistance for organizations needs to be enhanced, whether we are talking about organizations managed by and for the community or CALACS.

Those individuals not only have to be given an opportunity to continue developing, but criminals—the real abusers—have to be brought to justice. Individuals have to be provided with monitoring throughout their development. If that individual was a victim of abuse, they need support and assistance in their fight.

[The Chair, Conservative, Mike Wallace]

Thank you very much for those questions and answers. That is your time, Mrs. Ambler.

Now we are on to the New Democratic Party with Madam Péclet.

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

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Once again, I want to thank all the witnesses who have come to share their knowledge and opinions with us today. I think this is extremely important because we need you.

To continue in the same vein as my colleague, I would like to say that many jobs are dangerous. For instance, police officers and firefighters also risk their lives on a daily basis.

The Supreme Court was clear: prostitutes also have to be protected. I think we all agree when it comes to this.

I think it's interesting, Mrs. Phillips, because in your presentation you said that in nine years—with the local police in Victoria probably—they haven't charged anybody for human trafficking.

[Dr. Rachel Phillips]

I don't think I put a specific time frame to it. I asked my liaison just before we left—we didn't have a lot of notice—and they felt there had been one charge about seven years ago that had sort of fallen apart.

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

Okay.

[Dr. Rachel Phillips]

Essentially, no, there have not been charges.

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

So essentially in a couple of years there has been one charge?

[Dr. Rachel Phillips]

Certainly not in the last seven years....

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

In this debate we haven't clearly put a definition on the different terms, but I think it's important that we can differentiate in a debate. If I read the Criminal Code I think it's clear that trafficking in persons is defined as the following:

Every person who recruits, transports, transfers, receives, holds, conceals or harbours a person, or exercises control, direction or influence over the movements of a person, for the purpose of exploiting them or facilitating their exploitation is guilty of an indictable offence and liable

(a) to imprisonment for life if they kidnap, commit an aggravated assault or aggravated sexual assault....

So this is the definition of trafficking. There is also exploitation which is defined as this:

...a person exploits another person if they cause them to provide, or offer to provide, labour or a service by engaging in conduct that, in all the circumstances, could reasonably be expected to cause the other person to believe that their safety or the safety of a person known to them would be threatened if they failed to provide, or offer to provide, the labour or service.

I was just trying to note that if we define the term “trafficking” as it is defined in the Criminal Code and as exploitation is defined in the Criminal Code and prostitution...I was just wondering why there have been no charges for seven years with the existing laws. What will Bill C-36 bring to help those victims of trafficking and exploitation as it is defined in the Criminal Code?

[Dr. Rachel Phillips]

I can't really answer on behalf of the police on how they do their investigations, of course. I presume they are very attentive to complaints brought forward. It's not that they're ignoring the issue; they obviously haven't found the issue. So I trust that the laws against trafficking, were it to occur in our region, would be sufficient for pursuing criminal charges. I don't really see, necessarily, how Bill C-36 is clearly related to the issue of trafficking. I think it's a bit of a mess in terms of grabbing people who may not be at all trafficked.

I don't know if that was the question.

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

There is a difference between prostitution and the terms I have defined here in the Criminal Code.

[Dr. Rachel Phillips]

Yes.

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

So you would agree.

We're talking about resources. Ms. Ambler asked you a question about what we can do to help victims of those offences. I think we are all clear that inequality at its root is the cause of the vulnerability of women. I would just like to ask you, and maybe Ms. Potvin, to elaborate on your points where inequality needs to be targeted at its source so that maybe we can prevent people from being forced into prostitution and help those and protect those who want to stay in this industry so that both can co-exist.

[Dr. Rachel Phillips]

I would like to emphasize that we are not at all indifferent to people being victimized, in the context of the sex industry or people coming to us and saying they would like help with getting out of the sex industry.

One of the barriers we face in terms of a broad kind of social issue with regard to helping people is income assistance rates in our region, and the availability of affordable housing. Those are definitely things we should be focusing on in terms of the reduction of women entering the sex industry because they feel they need to for economic means. That's the reason that they're there, and I don't necessarily think that's the best reason to be somewhere. People should have options about how they earn money.

With regard to the Criminal Code, I think your second question related to what we can do to support women who have been victimized. Some of the trafficking laws, some of the laws that prevent sexual exploitation of minors, are good. Definitely in our region, it's been very positive to try to think of ways, through partnership and bridge-building between police, peers, and sex workers.... We're increasing reports of physical and sexual assault. Those are important laws for people in the sex industry, and it's very important that people report based on those laws. We have had underreporting.

[The Chair, Conservative, Mike Wallace]

Thank you very much.

Madame Potvin, do you want to add anything to that?

[Natasha Potvin]

You asked the question in English, but I would just like to add that, when it comes to education and prevention, a sex worker has to build their character. I am personally a big believer in peer education. I am currently working at AIDS Vancouver Island with people who have substance abuse issues. We are involved in what we call “street college”, which is a form of education provided by peers. I think that helps get the message across.

In schools, I have also delivered workshops on stigmatization, sex work and the understanding of the distinction between having and not having a choice.

I think this approach works. Peer education is very important. It makes it easier to establish a relationship with a young person who wants to go into sex work and explain to them what the consequences, risks and stigma involved are. If she then chooses to become a prostitute, she will at least know what the risks are, while also knowing that she can count on peers.

[The Chair, Conservative, Mike Wallace]

Thank you for those questions and answers.

Before we go to Mr. Dechert from the Conservative Party—and I'm not taking away from his time here—since the issue has been brought up, I do think, just for proper debate, that we put on the record that Public Safety Canada was asked that exact question.

As of October 2013, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police human trafficking national coordination centre is aware of 161 cases, since 2004, of human trafficking where specific charges were laid.

Of those, 152 were domestic human trafficking cases, and nine were international trafficking cases. The majority of the domestic human trafficking cases were sexual exploitation, whereas international human trafficking cases were primarily for forced labour.

Of the 161 trafficking cases, 47 have been completed through the courts, with human trafficking-specific or related convictions. Of the 47 cases that were involved—concerning some 124 victims—54 accused received convictions. Additionally, 20 of the 161 trafficking cases had other outcomes. Currently, there are 94—this was as of January 2014—out of 161 human trafficking cases remaining before the court, involving 144 accused and 172 victims.

Just so that everyone has the accurate information, that was from the analysts.

[Françoise Boivin, NDP, Gatineau, QC]

Oh, I thought you were testifying. I was ready to question you.

I'm just kidding. But kidding aside, can we have a copy of this, please?

[The Chair, Conservative, Mike Wallace]

Yes. We'll make sure that is distributed to everyone.

It is now the Conservatives' turn.

Mr. Dechert.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Just on that point, before I get to my other questions, some of the largest human trafficking cases in Canada have happened in the Toronto area, both in my area in west Toronto and in Hamilton—the international trafficking of human beings, in a number of cases, for the sex trade industry. So it may not happen everywhere in Canada. There are different experiences in different places, and I think that in areas where you have a large number of new Canadians, where there's a lot of international traffic, that's where you're likely to see that sort of thing. I suspect that the witnesses whom we had before us earlier today talking about Asian women trapped in the industry would probably say that a fair number of Asian women come into Canada as trafficked victims into the sex industry.

I just want to say to each of you that I very much appreciate your being here, bringing all your expertise and experience here, and I say the same thing to all of the witnesses who have appeared before us in every session this week. It's clearly high time that we had a national conversation about this issue. Sometimes things come before Parliament for convoluted reasons and in ways that we can't predict, but three people brought a case before the courts many years ago. It eventually reached the Supreme Court, as we all know, and the Supreme Court rendered a decision, penned by the Chief Justice, and here we all are today discussing this very important thing.

So whether we would have chosen to or not, it's a good thing that we're having this discussion, and whatever we decide, I think the situation going forward in Canada will be better. Chief Justice McLachlin said to the Parliament of Canada, to the 10 members of Parliament you see before you today, and to the other 300-odd who aren't here with us but are watching very closely, and to the members of the Senate, that the regulation of prostitution is a complex and delicate matter. I think from everything you said and everything we've heard that it's clear that's true.

It will be for Parliament, should it choose to do so, to devise a new approach. So we have before us one option. We can choose to go with the option that's before us as drafted. We can choose to make some changes to it. We could choose to do nothing at all, as two of the litigants who brought this case before us asked to do. Yesterday we heard from Ms. Scott and Ms. Lebovitch, and they would like us to do nothing at all, to let the laws that were struck down by the Supreme Court but are to be held in abeyance for the year expiring in December, and to have wide-open, unregulated, unfettered, legalized prostitution in Canada—anytime, anywhere, at the discretion of the purchasers and the sellers.

What do each of you think we should do? Should we choose to do something? Or should we choose to do nothing? Should we choose to criminalize the purchase of sex or not? And if we don't do anything, what do you think will be the state of affairs the next day in Canada and over the next 10 years? Where will we see ourselves in 10 years? We heard earlier in the week from experts on the situation in Europe, and they've told us that in Germany today, where they have wide-open, legalized prostitution, that there are over 400,000 sex workers and that there has been a significant increase in human trafficking, largely into Germany from Eastern Europe, but also from other countries. Conversely, we've heard that in Sweden—this from one of the key drafters of the Swedish model, which is part of what we're looking at today—that the experience has been different there. In Sweden there is less violence, fewer sex workers, less purchasing of sex, and there's less human trafficking.

So, given all of that, I'd like to hear from you on what you think we should do? Should we choose to do something or should we choose to turn our eyes the other way and do nothing at all?

Let's start with you, Ms. Steacy.

[Lisa Steacy]

Obviously, in my written submission and my oral submission, I think we do have to do something. I think it's important not only for the women who are in prostitution either by choice or by force, but also for all women, that we do something about prostitution.

We know, as my colleague and I were talking about earlier, that while not every single woman is raped, the fact that men rape women puts all women in a state of fear and danger, and I feel the same way about prostitution. I think right now we're talking about criminal law. That's the bill we have, a criminal law response to prostitution, and I think that as far as criminal law goes, I'll just reiterate my submission that with the striking of the provision that would criminalize women in some locations, I think that Bill C-36 is a fairly good start.

[Mélanie Sarroino]

I will not repeat what my colleague talked about, but I would simply say that I dream of a world where my daughter and I will be able to walk the streets without being seen as sexual objects by all men. I am not saying that all men are like that.

Yet I don't know how many times I have gone to a nightclub and was touched by a man without my permission. I don't know how many times I have been followed in the streets by a man who may have harmed me, and I managed to get away. I think something needs to be done. We have to stop saying that women can basically be bought.

I want to tell my colleague, for whom I have a tremendous amount of respect, that we do not judge women who are struggling with sex industry issues or have chosen to work in that industry. We speak on behalf of all women.

I simply hope that my daughter will grow up to be seen as a whole individual and that my son will see women and girls as whole individuals. So I think something has to be done about this.

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

Okay.

Let me ask you the second question. If we don't do anything, what do you think Canada will look like in terms of the prostitution business in 10 years?

[Mélanie Sarroino]

I think we'll be North America's brothel. I think it will like the Grand Prix in Montreal, or the Stampede. All the Americans will come. They come to Quebec for alcohol; why wouldn't they come for women?

I think it's a very dangerous step to take.