Justice Committee on Feb. 15th, 2022

[Miia Suokonautio]

I have spent my career in the social services, and this is exactly it.

As we said in our presentation, exploitation preys on vulnerability. All those things, like racism, histories of colonialism and all the marginalization, which heighten especially a young person's vulnerability also heighten their vulnerability to exploitation.

Again, we're not going to arrest our way out of vulnerability. It's really around addressing some of those more complex pieces.

One of our amazing colleagues here in Nova Scotia, Karen Bernard, who is the executive director of the Jane Paul Resource Centre for Mi'kmaw Women in Cape Breton, was in a meeting one time, and she said that colonialism is the perfect groomer, because there is no better way to tell you that you have no value.

For me, that has really echoed with the Nova Scotia Native Women's Association, with funding through WAGE, and we are serving on their advisory committee and working with them. They are currently conducting a provincial strategy and assessment on the situation for indigenous women. I think hearing their perspectives, along with what you have in your own missing and murdered indigenous women and girls report, is really significant. These things are very connected as well.

I feel very strongly that we need to keep in mind that what survivors are telling us will be the most effective tool. Also, does this committee have a lived experience advisory that is also going to be advising it? I would recommend that you do.

[The Chair, Liberal, Randeep Sarai]

Thank you to all the witnesses for your important testimony. You can listen on if you want, but the next panel of witnesses will come on. If there are any quick sound checks, I'll ask the clerk to do that, and then we can resume.

We'll suspend for two minutes.

[The Chair, Liberal, Randeep Sarai]

We will now have Ms. Lam from Butterfly (Asian and Migrant Sex Workers Support Network) for five minutes. After that, we'll have Ms. Kent for five minutes, and then we'll have questions.

[Elene Lam, Executive Director, Butterfly (Asian and Migrant Sex Workers Support Network)]

Good afternoon.

My name is Elene Lam. I am the executive director of Butterfly (Asian and Migrant Sex Workers Support Network). I have a master's in law and social work and have worked on human rights and gender-based violence for over 20 years, nationally and internationally.

Butterfly is a community-based organization that organizes and provides support to over 5,000 Asian workers who work in massage parlours and the sex industry across Canada. It includes permanent residents, refugees and non-status women.

As a sex worker rights organization, we are a defender of human rights and sex workers' safety. Today we will share the voices of Asian migrant sex workers with you, because we would like to tell you that this law does not prevent exploitation and does not protect women. It does the opposite and harms sex workers. It is a lie to say that sex workers can continue to work under this law. I can give you more evidence. We have done a lot of research and collected a lot of stories from sex workers about that.

Racialized and migrant women face violence, bad working conditions and exploitation every day in all industries, including caregiving and factory work. As a response, we do not see calls for criminalization of these industries; rather, we call for migrant and labour protections. Sex work is the way to resist oppression, access income, gain social resources and escape abusive relationships for many Asian and migrant women.

Most migrants dream that they can be free and safe when they move to Canada; however, reality is different. Criminalization of sex work and lobbying to eliminate the sex industry promote violence, racial profiling, discrimination and hate against sex workers. Hotel staff, landlords and even NGOs are asked to monitor sex workers. Cities shut down Asian massage parlours.

In the Atlanta shooting, six Asian women were killed. This is not unique in the U.S.; it has also happened in Canada. Seven Asian workers have been murdered. It's because of the hate of sex work. It's because of the criminalization of sex work. When you label sex work as violence, you don't recognize the real violence against the sex worker.

Criminalization means sex workers are often arrested and deported when they report violence. One sex worker who was seriously injured in a robbery said that she would rather suffer the violence than be arrested. When our Butterfly helpline rings at midnight, my heart pounds because I don't know if our member is being robbed, arrested or even murdered.

Essential systems for migrant sex workers, including friends, third parties and clients, are being framed as traffickers. They are arrested when they help each other. Almost 200 women were charged for procuring and advertising in the last few years. One of the sex workers was arrested just because she helped other workers to advertise, communicate and screen clients.

Instead of protection, law enforcement is the major source of violence. Thirty percent of sex workers report that they have been harassed, sexually assaulted and abused by law enforcement.

Due to the conflation of sex work and trafficking, law enforcement keeps targeting sex workers. The police broke the door with a warrant when a worker was sleeping. She was handcuffed and not allowed to get dressed before answering questions. Her ID was taken; her money and phone were taken away, and she was asked if she was safe. She told the police that she was safe before they came. She was terrified because she didn't know whether she would be deported, charged or outed.

The stereotype about Asian and migrant sex workers is that they are passive, ignorant trafficking victims, yet migrant sex workers have been vocal about the need to decriminalize sex work and remove the criminal law, immigration law and bylaws that invite the police into our lives. This law creates vulnerability. We are not victims. We are workers. We know best about our lives. We know how the law harms us.

In the words of migrant sex workers, you should not criminalize and take away our work. You should not control our bodies. If you really care about the rights and safety of the workers, you should respect our agency and listen to us. You should not put more harm and danger into our lives.

It is not only Butterfly that has witnessed this harm. Many organizations of violence against women and human rights organizations, like the Ontario Coalition of Rape Crisis Centres and the Global Business Coalition Against Human Trafficking, all bear witness and have shown opposition to the criminal law against sex workers.

We urge the government to listen to the community and repeal Bill C-36, which harms and kills sex workers.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Randeep Sarai]

Thank you, Ms. Lam.

Now over to you, Ms. Kent, for five minutes.

[Lynne Kent, Chair, Vancouver Collective Against Sexual Exploitation]

Good afternoon, everyone. Thank you for this opportunity to speak to you.

I am Lynne Kent, chair of the Vancouver Collective Against Sexual Exploitation. We are a collective of organizations and individuals with many years of work and experience in this field.

Bill C-36, in my understanding, is now a law called the Protection of Communities and Exploited Persons Act. It is socially, legally and relationally transformative in its approach to addressing the objectification and commodification of women and girls. It is a leading-edge instrument, recognized globally, and it is focused on protecting the right to life, liberty and the security of persons, which the sex trade violates every day.

Our government has been a global champion of comprehensive health rights and gender equality, and PCEPA provides you with all the opportunities to achieve this. It addresses the most significant factor in the disempowerment of women: the commercialization of women's bodies, which comes from supporting male demand and a sense of entitlement to sex whenever, wherever and with whomever they want. PCEPA says no and, in a recent poll, five times as many Canadians agreed.

Safety for women is what we are all advocating for. Preventing exploitation within the sex trade has proven to be impossible. The harm done to the women and girls being exploited is well documented, and repealing the law will do nothing to change that. In fact, it will increase both the harm and danger to those in prostitution, all women and children, and communities.

It is a cruel lie to suggest that changing this law will make it safer for anyone in the sex trade. The evidence is everywhere. The lobby to repeal this law is more about safety for the exploiters. Don't be fooled; the pimps, johns and traffickers are the only ones to benefit here.

Yes, listen to those in the sex trade, but which ones? Do you listen to the privileged few who claim to be there by choice, or the vast majority, who are there because of lack of choice, who have been lured, seduced and coerced, want out, can't get out, are trapped and have no voice? You won't hear from them. They won't be at this table, because they are not free to speak up.

The closest you can get to the truth is from the survivors, those who manage to get out and care enough about others to endanger themselves—make no mistake—and tell the full story. Those who truly care about the safety and well-being of everyone in the sex trade know there is no meaningful harm reduction. Laws can't be made to serve a few. This law must focus on the protection and safety of the majority.

New Zealand prostitutes protested, campaigned and lobbied for full decriminalization, only to find out that their own agency was reduced and all the benefit, control and power went to the brothel owners, pimps, johns and exploiters. If you repeal, you will increase the harm and danger to all women and children, specifically those who are indigenous, immigrant, poor and racialized, as well as every single child from age 10 to 18.

Do you want that to be your legacy? Do you want that on your conscience? We will be here to hold you accountable, to point the finger and lay the blame where the fault belongs. It is your responsibility to protect exploited communities and persons, not to facilitate the sex trade and the inherent severe harm you have been told about again and again.

We have submitted a brief that identifies what is valuable about PCEPA. However, this gold-standard law will achieve its potential only if it is implemented. We need consistent enforcement across the country. We need training of the police, a public education campaign and robust support for those exiting.

Where will you align yourself, on the side of Canadian citizens and communities or on the side of organized crime? It's not the law that causes the harm. It is the men who buy sex. Until we address the demand, nothing will change.

[The Chair, Liberal, Randeep Sarai]

Thank you, Ms. Kent.

I'll go over, for the first round, to Mr. Brock, for six minutes.

[Larry Brock, Conservative, Brantford—Brant, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you so much, Ms. Lam and Ms. Kent, for attending today and providing us with some valuable testimony as we study this piece of legislation. It's a legislative review of the PCEPA. I want to thank you for your advocacy.

I'm going to start with you, Ms. Kent. I took an opportunity, in preparing for this hearing, to look at your website. You touched upon it in your opening remarks. We've heard so far—and I'm sure we're going to hear more on later occasions and at later dates—witnesses who are proponents of decriminalization. We've heard supporters, such as you, strongly advocating for continuing on with the benefits of Bill C-36.

Can you expand for us a little on some of the disastrous effects of decriminalization in New Zealand?

[Lynne Kent]

Well, it's very interesting, because just a couple of years after their new law was brought in, they appeared for the first time on the TIP, trafficking in persons, report. They have been alerted in every report since that they have a problem with trafficking.

Here's what's really interesting. They claim they don't have a trafficking problem. In fact, I've seen from the sex workers organization that they're actually insulted at being told they have a trafficking problem. They reframe trafficking as a sex-work holiday, a wonderful opportunity for individuals to come to a beautiful location to work.

In fact, we have testimonies from sex workers in New Zealand who really feel betrayed. After all they put into it, they found themselves, as I said, lacking any agency. Really, the exploitation continued, but they had no recourse and no result because this was a legitimate business. Who was even looking for them? They certainly did not feel as though they could go and report to police.

Again, this comes back to why we can't even say our law creates harm, because it hasn't been implemented consistently in the country. There's a lack of training of police, a lack of public education. There has been no understanding of what's needed there. You can't claim harm from the law.

I do want to say that all of those harms exist, but we are laying all of those harms at the foot of this law when they more appropriately belong to many of our social services systems, definitely including child welfare. It throws children out on the street at age 19, and—guess what?—they end up in the sex trade. We know there are a lot of foster kids in the sex trade.

With regard to our health care system, indigenous people, LGBTQ people, and women in general complain that they are not treated well. They are discriminated against in medical treatments and in health care. For financial services, it's the same thing. We can't say that this law is causing harm—this harm and those harms—to sex workers.

[Larry Brock, Conservative, Brantford—Brant, ON]

Thank you for that.

You referenced the bill and commented that it's a gold-standard law; it's transformative; it's a leading-edge instrument. Can you propose any changes we might want to consider, by way of amendments, to this particular legislation, or areas we could consider as part of a potentially newer law to offer more protections for individuals trying to remove themselves from the situation?

[Lynne Kent]

The first thing I want to say is that I think there probably are some things that can be done to reduce the harm to sex workers, particularly educating the police and everyone. Sex workers should not be charged at all. That's what the law's intent was. We were going after the exploiters. We were going after the perpetrators of harm, not the people who are being harmed.

That, I think, is something that needs to be looked at. How do we ensure that the intent of the law is what is actually delivered? The only way will be through educating and training the police, educating the public and rolling out those supports to those who want out.

The law addresses all of that, but we have not been following it.

[Larry Brock, Conservative, Brantford—Brant, ON]

Ms. Lam, just quickly, please, can you offer any suggestions by way of any potential amendments to Bill C-36 to offer greater protection to Asian migrant workers?

[Elene Lam]

I think it is very clear that repealing the whole law is the way to protect Asian and migrant sex workers. Ms. Kent said that only the privileged and pimps are asking to repeal the law. No: Thousands and thousands of sex workers in Canada are telling you that this law kills us. It needs to be repealed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Randeep Sarai]

Thank you.

Ms. Dhillon, you have six minutes.

[Anju Dhillon, Liberal, Dorval—Lachine—LaSalle, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'd like to thank our witnesses for coming in today.

Ms. Lam, you mentioned something that really struck me. When I was practising criminal law, it would be the same sentiment I'd get sometimes from my clients. You spoke about how your heart pounds when you hear the phone ringing at night.

Can you please tell us a little more about what you mean by that? What kinds of situations arise to make you feel this way? How do you yourself cope with it? We can experience vicarious trauma, and from the way you have spoken and testified today, I can sense it from you.

Could you please answer these three questions? If you want me to repeat them for you, I will surely do so.

[Elene Lam]

Thank you so much, and I think you asked a very important question. This is what we witness in the community every day, how sex workers are being harmed by the law. Why are they being targeted by the perpetrator? It's because they know the law does not protect them. They know the law is targeting them.

I have to very sadly say that [Technical difficulty—Editor] attend a Parliament meeting. One other thing I organize most is funerals. Every time I see the dead body of a sex worker, I ask why. Why do we still have this law? We know this law keeps killing people. We know the law makes it so the sex worker cannot work safely. When sex workers protect each other.... For example, some sex workers cannot speak English. The other sex worker helps them to communicate with clients. That sex worker is then put in jail, and the original sex worker has to work in a very vulnerable situation.

Why do we still do it? I really don't understand why so many people say.... Particularly, I see lots of people say it's not sex workers, it's not racialized, and it's not migrants. They keep saying that they know better than the community. If you really, really care about the exploitation and the safety of the worker, the answer is very simple. Repeal this law.

I have been working with a lot of sex workers in New Zealand. I have worked with a lot of support [Technical difficulty—Editor] country they have criminalized sex workers less. They are less vulnerable. They are able to seek help. The whole conflation of sex work and trafficking has increased policing and increased the vulnerability of the worker.

I really hope that, after this meeting, we will have a report that really reflects the reality of how this law harms sex workers and cannot protect them from exploitation, because many organizations—not only sex worker organizations but human rights organizations and violence against women organizations—keep telling you. We really hope the law can be changed, that no sex worker will die because of the hate of sex work, because this view provokes hate of sex workers. We remember the six Asian women murdered in Atlanta because the murderer said they wanted to eradicate sex workers.

When I hear so many people here say they want to eliminate sex workers, for me, this is no different. They die because of your hate of sex workers, but these are the bodies of sex workers. Whether you like it or not is your decision, but you do not have the power to exercise your power over other women. When you say that men should not use the bodies of women, I have to tell you: stop using the bodies of sex workers to benefit your career and to get more funding.

Sex workers keep telling you this law kills us. Sex workers say this law does not protect us. This is a very important message. I want you to hear this, and I also want all the people who advocate for the end-demand model of criminalizing sex work to hear this. You need to really think about what you are doing. We really don't want to see more sex workers killed.

Thank you.

[Anju Dhillon, Liberal, Dorval—Lachine—LaSalle, QC]

Thank you, Ms. Lam, and you are absolutely correct. We don't want to see more sex workers come to harm.

Can you talk to us a bit about interactions with the authorities? In your opinion and your experience, what have you seen when there are interactions between sex workers and the authorities, especially when they're racialized or don't speak English? Can you tell us what the difference of treatment is between the way they are treated and the way other people, other sex workers, are treated, or is there no difference? Are they all—racialized or not—just seen as the same? Could you please make these distinctions, so we can better understand? Thank you.

[Elene Lam]

Yes. You have raised a very important question. Criminalization of sex work also provides strong powers for law enforcement to conduct racial profiling. We have so many Asian sex workers who are being arrested. The police say that when they go on the Internet, they search for the Asian section, so they are being targeted because they are Asian. There is the assumption that they are victims, which leads to their arrest.

Also, because of the conflation of sex work and trafficking, any sex worker working for or helping other sex workers will be arrested. It is criminalized. It's very clear that this law gives lots of power to law enforcement to target the sex worker. Police cannot be trained, because this law is designed to target sex workers. Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Randeep Sarai]

Thank you, Ms. Dhillon. Thank you, Ms. Lam.

Next I have Madame Michaud for six minutes.

[Kristina Michaud, Bloc, Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to the witnesses for being here.

As I told the previous panel, I'm trying to navigate my way through all of this. The discussion is an extremely important, but unique, one. Usually, when the committee hears from witnesses, everyone more or less agrees on the solutions, and a consensus emerges to some extent. In this case, however, opinions are divided. This is seen as a black and white issue, and we have heard good arguments from both sides. On one hand, we're being told that the way to protect victims of sexual exploitation is to repeal the act. On the other hand, we are being told that we should strengthen the act in order to protect them.

I'll start with you, Ms. Kent.

You said repealing the act would not make victims of sexual exploitation any safer. You said we need to focus on the demand.

How can we do that?

I know you touched on it, but I'd like you to elaborate, if you could.

[Lynne Kent]

Well, the law actually does that. The law is focused on the demand.

I absolutely hear Ms. Lam's testimony. I want to say that I've heard this from survivors as well. I've heard the same things. They are saying that they're tired of burying their friends, but they recognize that it is not the law that has buried their friends. It is the buyers and the exploiters who have caused the harm that has buried their friends. Sometimes it's suicide, because of the work.

As an organization, we have no funding. We are all volunteers. We include sex workers, past brothel owners, survivors and multiple people who are working with sex workers. That's what we're hearing from them.

The law is not about criminalizing sex work. When I say it's not being implemented, that's the problem. It's very fulsome. It gives us all the tools to do exactly what Ms. Lam is asking for. Within this law are tools to protect sex workers. It comes back to this: Why are people being harmed? Why are people afraid of the police? We are not educating and training the police to implement this law the way it was intended.

We also know that the exploiters are educating the sex workers—the individuals—to be afraid of the law, to be afraid of the police and to not go to the police because it puts them in danger. They don't want it out there that they have harmed them in some way or that they've been assaulted.

We're laying a lot of blame on the law that doesn't belong on the law. As a result, as long as we do that, we really are ignoring the underlying issues that are leading to harm within sex work and violence against women, period.

I just want to say to you, Ms. Michaud, that I have listened to the testimonies and your questions. I really appreciate the extent to which you are seeking information and looking at all sides of this issue in trying to deal with a very complex issue in a kind and supportive way. I certainly appreciate how difficult it is for legislators to wend their way through this issue to really address what the law is trying to address.

[Kristina Michaud, Bloc, Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC]

Thank you.

You said that police need more training or that their training should cover additional components. I agree with you on that. I'm on the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security, and we are forever coming across new areas where police training is needed. It's an ongoing effort. It's clear that their training could be more extensive.

I can understand why victims have not had positive experiences with police and are afraid. The act puts them in an awkward position because they are afraid to speak out. They operate in an illegal world, but they are still trying to work, to do their job. Marylène Levesque, a young woman in Quebec City, was killed last year by a repeat offender. She was probably afraid to go to police.

Even if police do receive more training, how do we deal with those other factors?

I didn't leave you much time to answer. My apologies.

[Lynne Kent]

I'll be really quick. Certainly we have [Technical difficulty—Editor] here in Vancouver. There needs to be a combination of the police and a social worker, so that these women are not only faced with the justice system, but also have a social worker with them who is looking after their benefit.

Certainly, our police here have done that with family services. They have worked very closely with family services to have an advocate with them when they are dealing with an issue of a sex worker.

[The Chair, Liberal, Randeep Sarai]

Thank you.

We'll go over to you, Mr. Garrison, for six minutes.

[Randall Garrison, NDP, Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke, BC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I want to turn back to Ms. Lam and first of all thank her for her very important testimony. It is clearly based on work with the sex workers rather than opinions about sex workers.

Ms. Lam, I want to just explore in a bit more detail the problems created for those without legal status in Canada that potentially result from this law. When you talk about a reluctance to go to the police because people may not have legal status, what exactly are you talking about there, Ms. Lam?