Evidence of meeting #42 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.
2:15 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Mike Wallace
Thank you very much for those questions and answers.
Our next questioner is Mr. Casey from the Liberal Party.
2:15 p.m.
Liberal
Sean Casey Liberal Charlottetown, PE
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Ms. Phillips, we've heard from a couple of lawyers who have expressed some concern over the reverse-onus provisions. You describe it in your brief as an assumption of guilt in regard to persons who live with or are habitually in the company of persons. I know you talked about that in your opening statement. I get the sense, however, that your concern over this provision is more from a policy perspective than from a legal and constitutional one. So tell me whether or not that is the case, and feel free to expand on why you find this offensive outside of the legal constitutional context.
2:15 p.m.
Executive Director, PEERS Victoria Resource Society
I'm not a legal expert by any means. I just think when you put people in a position where they have to prove themselves, there's the possibility for discrimination. For example, we mentioned in our brief that people who live on the street are in relationships. They often will help each other in the context of the sex industry and spotting. It's not clear to us that those relationships, which are intimate relationships, which can be supportive relationships, would be recognized in the exceptions that exist there. Similarly, for people who are both substance users and are in the kinds of relations that emerge around substance use, particularly in street-based, substance-abuse environments, it's not clear they would fall within those exceptions as well, or that they might be viewed differently because of social, economic kinds of discrimination.
2:20 p.m.
Liberal
Sean Casey Liberal Charlottetown, PE
Okay, thank you.
Ms. Quinn, we're almost at the end of our list of 60 witnesses. It's a little bit hard to imagine that someone would come forward this late in the day with an idea that we've heard the first time, but you have. Thank you, and congratulations for that.
Your suggestion that we go back a couple of decades and expunge the criminal records of anyone who's been charged with solicitation is, frankly, very refreshing and brand new to us. You're the first one who's raised it.
What you may not know is that there's no longer any such thing as a pardon in this country.They're now called record suspensions. Recently, they've become much more difficult to get. The fee has quadrupled. The waiting time has been extended. The people for whom it is available has gotten smaller.
But given that this is the first time that we've heard about this, I'd like to do two things. I would invite you to make any further comments you have with respect to that specific idea, and then hopefully we'll have time to go around the table to all of the other witnesses to see whether they also like this idea that's been presented for the first time.
Thank you.
2:20 p.m.
Executive Director, Centre to End All Sexual Exploitation
Thank you very, very much, Mr. Casey.
Actually, we did raise this two years ago when the bill was being debated. I was one of 16 witnesses to the independent committee. We provided documentation about the harmful effects of criminal records. Unfortunately, I think that got tabled.
So we thought it was important to raise it again in our brief to the standing committee to be true to the women, men, and transgendered persons whom we have seen burdened by criminal records.
Again, we've done a little bit of research. I mentioned that in Scotland, it just goes away. There's no process. I think we have made our pardon—well, I know now it's not even a pardon. I think that we've made it very onerous, very expensive, and we still continue to punish people.
We would like to see a whole different approach, again with the intent of this bill, to recognize the vulnerabilities the come from exploitation. We would like to see us go one step further and just expunge those records. They're doing that in the United States. There have been several successful cases.
We actually have run a court diversion program in Edmonton since 2002. The crown has enabled us to invite women to work on their own diversion plan—what they saw as the root causes for why they were being exploited—because many women were being charged under section 213. We then presented that to the crown. The crown would then approve the plan. Then it was our role to walk with women and support them as they accomplished their plan.
We've had very creative crown prosecutors roll up eight charges—including those under section 213, failure to appear, breach of warrants—and wipe those records clean. This was before they became entrenched. But the challenge is that there are many people who have not yet come forward because of the cost of this record suspension, and so they still carry the weight of the criminal record that may date back to the 1990s.
We'd be very happy to send you all of the work we have done and the research that we did prepare for that earlier committee. I think we would do a great thing for people, a great breath of hope, if we would say, “Come in out of the cold, from the discrimination you have experienced, and have that chance for an education, get that public housing you need, go to school if you want to become a social worker, you are part of our community.”
So I thank you so much for raising that question.
2:20 p.m.
Liberal
Sean Casey Liberal Charlottetown, PE
Yes, please.
To all of other witnesses, I'd be most interested in your view on the idea put forward by Ms. Quinn of essentially an amnesty for old or existing solicitation charges.
2:20 p.m.
British Columbia, Canadian Association of Sexual Assault Centres
I 100% agree. I think it's a fantastic idea, especially in light of the fact that inequality and discrimination really play a part in who ends up with a criminal record. I think it's completely consistent with our equality-based arguments that this would be the case.
2:25 p.m.
Conservative
2:25 p.m.
Member, Board of Directors, Peers Victoria Resource Society
I am definitely in favour of decriminalization.
I think that's really a good start. A criminal record can close many doors. I did this job of my own free will, but if I had a criminal record, I may have had problems with my other jobs.
2:25 p.m.
Member, Board of Directors, Peers Victoria Resource Society
I did have one, but it was expunged because it involved a miscarriage of justice. Having that record was very limiting for me.
2:25 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Mike Wallace
Ms. Gerrard, do you want to...?
Is your mike on, Ms. Gerrard?
There you go; we hear you now.
2:25 p.m.
Director, Defend Dignity, The Christian and Missionary Alliance
Hi, there.
I heartily agree. There will be a reference to the woman in southern Ontario whom I spoke of in my presentation.
She told me that she just about lost hope when she was denied access to the program. She was almost finished and had to do her placement to finish and could not get her criminal record dealt with. The only recourse she had was to wait and try to earn enough money. She told me that the figure was, I think, $1,000 that it was going to cost her. She put every penny she had into schooling. When I last spoke with her, in March this year, she was still waiting, trying to earn the money she would need to deal with this criminal charge.
So I heartily agree. I think we need to expunge all those former records. That would make a very clear statement that the legislation means what it says when it recognizes that women are truly exploited and that this has been a detriment to their getting successfully out of prostitution.
2:25 p.m.
Conservative
2:25 p.m.
Executive Director, Servants Anonymous Society of Calgary
Yes. It's a great idea; we support it 100%. We've had pretty good success with our employment programs, with women working with people in the community who give them jobs and are willing to not be as concerned about a criminal record. However, some of the women we have seen who would like to enter different professions can't do so without having a clean criminal record. So we applaud this; we think it's a great idea.
You've done a good job, Kate.
2:25 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Mike Wallace
Thank you very much. Thank you for those questions and answers.
Our next questioner, from the Conservative Party, is Ms. Ambler.
July 10th, 2014 / 2:25 p.m.
Conservative
Stella Ambler Conservative Mississauga South, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you to all of our witnesses for being here today. We very much appreciate your time and efforts. Thank you also for the work that you do in your communities and in your cities, working with women who are prostituted.
My first question is for PEERS Victoria Resource Society; it has to do with screening. You talked about this, and we've been talking about it this week in our meetings. You mentioned that sex workers need to be able to freely communicate in order to establish security. But we have heard from other witnesses, even just on this panel, that screening is really a misnomer and that it doesn't matter how much screening you do.
Yesterday we heard from a woman who was trafficked who said that she thought the guy she was in a car with was safe and fine, until he pulled the crowbar out from under the seat, and then she didn't remember anything for the next two days about that.
I'm wondering how to reconcile all of this, everything from using the terms “prostituted women” to “sex workers”, and you called it “escorting”. Is this really possible? Is it really possible, and are you just a member of a small group of women who are lucky enough to practise in a relatively safer environment?
2:25 p.m.
Executive Director, PEERS Victoria Resource Society
There are three questions there.
I use multiple terms. Multiple terms are used within the sex industry—it's part of its diversity—so I will flip back and forth between those terms. I don't think the sex industry is homogenous and that I can use one term to describe all of it.
I don't think screening has to be 100% effective to be a tool that sex workers value and saves them some of the time. I don't think that should be the condition on which we evaluate screening.
As for our being a small group, I don't know. Various claims have been made about the “vast majority” left, right, and centre over the past week. I think we belong to a sizeable group and a group that deserves a voice as well.
2:30 p.m.
Conservative
Stella Ambler Conservative Mississauga South, ON
I appreciate that. I'm not sure that we know what the numbers are—I don't think anyone knows, because of the nature of the business—but you also talked about human rights, except that you talked about it in the context of sex workers, the violation of their human rights. As did Natasha Potvin, you mentioned that you liked some of your clients, and liked some of them less, but that overall you're proud of your choice and that it's worked for you in your life.
The way you tell it, frankly, it sounds like a TV sitcom about happy hookers. I just can't reconcile this with the other things I've heard. I'm wondering if this bill were enacted, would it put you out of business?
2:30 p.m.
Member, Board of Directors, Peers Victoria Resource Society
I think that would have prevented me from working in safety. I would have been more afraid, since my clients could be criminalized. That's very important. Assessing clients is very important.
Among sex workers, we send one another messages and warnings to be careful. A list of problematic clients is provided by certain organizations managed by and for the community. If this legislation is passed, my clients will be criminalized, and the good ones may stay away.
The bad clients are the ones who may not fear justice or police. Like in any other job, there are good and bad clients. We like some clients a lot and others a bit less. However, criminalizing clients—who could be a colleague, a brother or a sister of yours—will definitely put off someone who has a family life and fears losing their job.
We shouldn't forget that about 10% of my clientele was made up of women. I had women clients. What is to be done with them? It is said that clients are bad people, men who persecute, but there are also female clients. No one talks about that. Should they also be considered as perverts? What are we to do with that problem?
I think the way this legislation criminalizes clients will not fix anything. It will simply shift the issue and bring back the witch hunts that were being carried out before.
2:30 p.m.
Conservative
Stella Ambler Conservative Mississauga South, ON
I'm not sure, though. I'm going to disagree with one of your statements that it's like any other job and some clients are good and some are bad. I can tell you that I have lots of meetings in this job and I know people who work for other types of companies, and they may like some clients and dislike others, but they're not afraid that any of them are going to hit them with crowbars, or chain them to a bed for a week and starve them or torture them.
I think that kind of violence is much more inherent in the business that you're in than any other, that I'm aware of.
2:30 p.m.
Member, Board of Directors, Peers Victoria Resource Society
I would like to add something to this.
When I was 18 years old, I had a friend who worked in a corner store and was murdered. There are risks everywhere.
It's true that the risk is very high in sex trade. That's why we need organizations managed by and for the community, and the issue needs to be decriminalized and regulated. Minors also need to be protected. However, job-related risks are everywhere.
It's true that the risk is higher in our field. However, as I was saying, I lost a friend who was working in a corner store. She was attacked with a firearm.