Status of Women Committee on Nov. 23rd, 2006

[Maria Minna, Liberal, Beaches—East York, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

First of all, thank you. I very much appreciate your frankness and directness on this issue.

There are a couple of areas I want to look at.

There is another committee of the House actually looking at prostitution, the committee on justice. I was discussing this with one of the members of that committee. They are looking at legalization, I would say, and that's not a good idea, in that Sweden has done the opposite. They have criminalized the user and decriminalized.... And she was saying the Swedish system is not working. Can you enlighten us a bit about some of the pros and cons of this research as to whether it's working or not and why? It may not be perfect, but there might be some things. You know a lot more about it than I do, since you mentioned it just a few minutes ago, and you also mentioned helping women to get out and how that works. What do they have in place to get women out who want to get out of it?

I have a couple more questions on other areas. Could you just touch on that very quickly?

[Victor Malarek]

When the Swedish model came into play, one of the things that happened was for the first couple of years nothing happened. Trafficked women were still being trafficked and the prostitution trade went wild. The women who were on the committees and whatever couldn't understand why. What happened was the message has to get through to the top echelons of the prosecutors and judges, all the way down to the cop on the beat, and on the beat they are largely men. They had to understand what was going on and understand just what prostitution was--that it is not a victimless crime and that something had to be done.

The Swedish government ended up putting a program into place to educate the police on the beat, prosecutors, and judges. Once that was done they started to go out and do their job, which was to stop the johns--the prostitute users--and not go after the prostitutes. What's happened now in Sweden is the number of women trafficked into Sweden is very small, almost negligible. It used to be big. The traffickers figure there is too much trouble and too many problems to bother ever going into Sweden, so they've taken off to other countries, like Finland.

[Maria Minna, Liberal, Beaches—East York, ON]

That's good to know.

[Victor Malarek]

It is working, because they offered programs to these young women who want out. About 60% of women in prostitution wanted out, went to those programs, and got out.

The johns are subject to fines, and if they keep going to these places, they're subject to six months in jail, plus being identified. It's not a great thing to be identified. So it is working.

[Maria Minna, Liberal, Beaches—East York, ON]

That's good. I'm glad to hear it, because it's been my position to charge the johns for a long time. I know that they've tried it in some countries, not as part of the law, but as a voluntary thing.

I was in Italy a few years back—because I go back and forth quite a bit—and they had a system. But as my colleague was saying, the men who make the rules were being identified, and they happened to be the guys with money, so they have the influence. They said, well, we can't. But they weren't being criminalized; they were simply being identified publicly. Of course they killed that program pretty fast, because the influence was, why are we being identified? We have the power, right?

It doesn't work if it's voluntary, and that's the other thing I wanted to say.

When I flip channels and watch a late program, I'm really bothered by the girls suggestively...the infomercials. I don't see that as having any place whatsoever on my screen; I don't care what time of day it is. It's not even a soft porn movie with some sort of connecting story. It's just call–I want your input on that.

That's two questions. Is that the thin edge of the wedge, or maybe we can't go after it?

The other question concerns that as some of our witnesses said, the problem of charging is the claim that it's consensual. How would you deal with the issue of consensual versus non-consensual in court, if a man is saying yes, this was–?

[Victor Malarek]

It's not consensual if you make it a criminal matter for men. If you criminalize men, it's not consensual.

In the legalized systems in Germany and the Netherlands, the pimps and organized crime are still there.

[Maria Minna, Liberal, Beaches—East York, ON]

It's just legal.

[Victor Malarek]

To think otherwise is foolish. They are there; I've seen them operate, and it doesn't matter.

Also the criminal aspect of it dwarfs the legal aspect, because they know the amount of money, and they know they bring these women in by the busload, the truckload, by the dozens every night.

Remember, the sad reality for these young women is they're only good to these men for a few years. Then they're discarded back to impoverished countries that look at these women as nothing but prostitutes, whores, sluts, harlots, and whatever. They end up being stigmatized and re-stigmatized, and many end up committing suicide, because there's nothing for these women when they get back home.

One of the things I say—and I said this to the President of the Ukraine when I met him on this issue—is that countries allowing their young women to be trafficked wholesale should hold their heads in shame, for not fighting hard enough to do something for these women and protect the weakest in their society. The biggest shame goes to the western countries that bring these women in by the planeload, truckload, and boatload to work out the sexual fantasies of their men and for sex tourism.

Germany and the Netherlands make huge amounts of money on sex tourism for their tax coffers. That's why I look at Germany as one of the biggest brothels on the planet now, with 400,000 women working the streets. You have to wonder about that.

I've sort of lost my track now.

[Maria Minna, Liberal, Beaches—East York, ON]

That's okay.

What's your take on infomercials?

[Victor Malarek]

Yes, infomercials. You know what? I've seen them and I go click. I know what's behind those. It is a sexy little girl, but boy, you should see who you're getting on the phone. Wake up, guys; it's not this girl. I just turn them off; everybody has the ability.

It's the same thing with the Internet. You can go on the Internet, and it gets far worse there. You just don't do it. Again it goes back to the education of men. Where's the screw that needs tightening that pushes them to this level?

When I was growing up, guys would get their stuff in a brown paper envelope that came through Canada Post. If you waited on Canada Post back then, it probably came in about four to five or six weeks, then it would be out of date.

Men don't go to bars and brag—hey, where can I buy myself a chick?—because that's not cool. The Internet has given them the opportunity, where they chat on chat lines in absolute anonymity. They use those handle names, and they tell each other where to go and what to do.

On those various sites, which I have examined, there are people sending messages saying, hey, guys, this is the reality out there. But they're not concerned about the reality; they're only concerned about their two, three, or four minutes of bliss. They don't care about the misery they're causing, and this is the message that has to be drummed into the heads of these men repeatedly, but it isn't.

As for TV infomercials, and Eye Weekly and Now magazines—and any other voice that wants to be trumpeting this stuff—I always say to men, ignore it; don't get involved in it.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Okay, I have to move on.

You will have to be our last questioner, Ms. Smith.

[Joy Smith, Conservative, Kildonan—St. Paul, MB]

Okay, thank you. Are we running out of time, Madam Chair?

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

I think so.

[Joy Smith, Conservative, Kildonan—St. Paul, MB]

You've covered a lot of the things that were very salient. You talked about decriminalization; the Swedish model, which is working; studies about prostitutes; and so on. But the one real concern I have is that every time there's a great sports event in a country, truckloads and boatloads of young girls and boys are brought in to service the Olympics. It's behind the scenes.

The Vancouver Olympics are coming up now. I'm looking forward to the sports aspect, but also I'm not looking forward to the Olympics, because of the women and children who will be victimized there.

What could we do specifically right now, in terms of preventing that from happening? We have a bill in the House on raising the age of consent, for instance, which I'm hoping goes through this round. Are there other kinds of legalization measures that could be done? The Olympics are fast approaching. We are the receiving country, and we have people here who will be victimized at that event.

[Victor Malarek]

The Olympics in Greece and the world football championship in Germany saw the trafficking of tens of thousands of extra women for the pleasure of sex tourists.

Canada can easily thwart that for the Olympics, simply by telling the visa staff in embassies and consulates around the world to be on the lookout for young women and for those behind these young women.

The Americans do it all the time. Their consulates and embassies watch for young women applying for visas, and who and what are behind them. They have actually identified thousands of girls, prior to their coming to the United States. Before issuing the visas, they say no, we know what's going on here.

For the Olympics in Vancouver, this message can easily be sent out. Again, these girls are not coming from England, France, and Germany; they will be coming from the impoverished countries. When you see them lining up for visas, you have to ask the question, how did they get the money, and what kind of work will they be doing? You could stop it at that point.

One of the strange things about Germany and the Netherlands is that they say the women who are coming there know exactly what they're doing. They don't speak the language, they don't have the business acumen, and they don't know the names of the streets—they don't know anything when they get there. How did they get there? Who was the facilitator? It's organized crime; that's always the facilitator.

These women suddenly show up and say, well, there's no pimp behind us. The brothels in the Netherlands and Germany take 50%; that's pimping and that's all it is. These women are not there independently.

In the streets of Rome, Paris, and Berlin, I saw the pimps in the dark alleys and shadowed cars. Those pimps belong to organized crime gangs; they will not let go of this because of the money. The Netherlands and Germany know who the gangs are, and the cops can't do a damn thing about it, because they can't figure out who's legal and who's illegal now. Once you open that floodgate, try to close it.

[Joy Smith, Conservative, Kildonan—St. Paul, MB]

Victor, thank you, because your presentation has been absolutely amazing.

On another thing, when you're talking about education, I've been personally amazed by the lack of knowledge about the human trafficking here in Canada. In talking to RCMP and police officers, a lot of them lack the training. In talking to even the everyday people, even elected officials, the lack of knowledge about it has been absolutely amazing and astounding.

Could you comment on our role as the status of women committee in bringing this issue right up in Canadian faces? Concerning what you said about men refusing to get involved, those laws have to be put in place. They have to be involved or be criminalized if they participate. The johns are the ones who should be criminalized, not the poor victims. Could you comment on the status of women committee here, because we have really taken this on this term. We have fought to take it on, and I'd just like your comments on it.

[Victor Malarek]

When I look at this issue around the world, it strikes me as very sad that it is not a top priority with all women's organizations and groups involved in human rights. This is a modern-day human rights tragedy of epic proportions. That's what it is. We see that 800,000 young women are trafficked every year into foreign countries, not to mention the millions who are internally trafficked into the sex trade, and no one is speaking out and saying this is a travesty. About the only argument we occasionally hear is the legalization argument, and it bothers me. This is an issue about dignity. I never, ever would stand around and allow this to happen to my daughter, and no one else would want it to happen to theirs.

Most of these young women who I've pulled out of some of the brothels in places like Kosovo were sad teenaged girls. They were just starting out their lives, and their lives are destroyed by disease--psychologically, spiritually, and medically. This has to be a top priority for all nations, for anyone who is involved in human rights, and particularly for women's groups, because this is about women and girls.

In Canada, I am proud to say that the RCMP have taken this and put it front and centre. There are a number of people I've met within the RCMP--one is Sergeant Lori Lowe--who are making this a priority and are trying to make certain this does not happen in Canada and doesn't explode on the streets of Canada, but we have to be aware.

One of the problems with this whole thing is that we hear about prostitutes and immediately dismiss these women. Who cares about them? They're just whores. The thing is that when you look into their eyes, you see they are victims. The vast majority are victims. They don't want to be there. It is our responsibility to try to do something to get them off the streets and not to recruit even more onto the streets of Canada.

Again, we can take a lead role in the whole issue of trafficking, of women being forced or somehow duped into prostitution, and play the card that's called dignity, which is the most important thing that we live for.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you, Mr. Malarek.

Ms. Mourani has asked for a minute for one question. Then we are going to have to close off this section of our meeting.

[Maria Mourani, Bloc, Ahuntsic, QC]

Thank you for your generosity, Madam Chair.

Mr. Malarek, I just have one question. We have had many witnesses who told us that the public needs to be made aware of the impact of the sex trade on prostitution, stripper bars, and so on.

Now I’ve read that the groups defending sex work are funded by the government. At the same time, cuts at Status of Women will make it very complicated for women to defend their rights.

I find it a bit strange—tell me if I’m wrong—that groups defending sex work are funded from taxpayers’ money, when we are being told that money must be put into making the public aware of the fact that prostitution tramples on women’s rights.

Don’t you think that if these groups are being funded, it should stop, and our money should instead be invested in educating the public about prostitution and its impact on women?

[Victor Malarek]

If sex trade workers are being funded by taxpayers' money, I would find that shocking and it should stop. If you really want to know the impact of this trade on the vast majority of women, all you would have to do is go to Norma Hotaling, who has an organization out of San Francisco. They will bring thousands of women and young girls forward to tell every one of you what has happened to them and the reality of their lives.

Again, I question this. Who are these advocates? Who is behind them? There is no union. These girls out there are controlled by pimps. They do not speak for themselves. Who is behind this so-called group that wants to promote the sex trade?

Again, I will say, there are women who want to do this--fine. The vast majority don't. Who is speaking for the vast majority? That's the problem. Who is funding this? If the government is funding this, they should stop. If these women believe that the sex trade work is a great place to be, why shouldn't they just fund themselves? Why don't the brothel owners and massage parlour owners, who are making huge amounts of money, fund them? We shouldn't be funding that.

What we should be funding are victims and people who want out, to give them an opportunity to get out. It really bothers me, if this is correct, that any money would go to these so-called sex trade workers and we would say, now we're going to listen to you because you speak for it. They speak for no one. They speak for a handful of people. All the studies show that 89% to 92% of women want out. They want out. Who are they speaking for? Are you giving them money to speak for 8% or 9%? Let them do what they want to do, but we have to give the opportunity to young women who don't want to be in this a way out. We have to create that situation for them, not make it easier for johns, not make it easier for clients, not make it easier for pimps and brothel owners. That's what we're doing. When you tolerate, you create a really bad situation, and that's what we've done over the last number of years. Money for sex workers to promote--forget it.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Mr. Malarek, have you had an opportunity to appear before the subcommittee that's looking at the whole issue of decriminalization of the prostitution issue? Have you had an opportunity to appear before that subcommittee?

[Victor Malarek]

No, I haven't, nor have I been invited, but I certainly would go.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

I think they have just reconvened very recently, and we might want to pass on a suggestion that you might want to appear before them.

[Patricia Davidson, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Can I speak to that?

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Yes.