Escapefromstress

[B]Dominatrix Terri-Jean Bedford to Receive 2014 Ontario Civil Liberties Association Award in Ottawa this Friday[/B] (Ottawa, November 10, 2014) â?? Recent developments have underlined a strong societal need to protect the freedoms of consenting adults in all spheres of personal, work, and professional activities. Miss Terri-Jean Bedford will receive the previously-announced 2014 OCLA Civil Liberties Award at a public event in Ottawa this Friday, November 14: Time: 7pm, November 14, 2014 Place: Alumni Auditorium, University of Ottawa (The Alumni Auditorium is in the Jock-Turcot University Centre building, 85 University Private) Miss Bedford has fought for the freedom, dignity, and safety of sex workers in Canada. She has joined many prominent Canadians and dedicated activists to this end. She has opposed the unjust laws affecting her profession in court, in the streets, in the Senate, in the press, and in her writings. She has even been to jail under these laws. Miss Bedford has been an inspiration to those who work to correct societyâ??s moral and legal hypocrisy, and to secure a human right of adult individuals to provide and buy or exchange personal ........ by informed consent without the stateâ??s interference. The event is co-sponsored by CUPE 2626 (Union of Student Workers at the University of Ottawa). About the Ontario Civil Liberties Association (OCLA) The OCLA vigorously advocates for authentic and unqualified freedom of expression of individuals, on all topics and in every form, in accordance with the right to free expression enshrined in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The OCLA also advocates for unimpeded civil liberties and civil rights of all persons, in dealings with public and private institutions and corporations. Contact: Joseph Hickey Executive Director Ontario Civil Liberties Association (OCLA) [URL]http://ocla.ca[/URL] 613-252-6148 (c) [EMAIL="[email protected]"][email protected][/EMAIL] [URL="http://blog.terrijeanbedford.com/2014/11/10/dominatrix-terri-jean-bedford-to-receive-ontario-civil-liberties-award/"]http://blog.terrijeanbedford.com/201...berties-award/[/URL]

A 43-year-old Winnipeg man has been charged with the human trafficking of a 25-year-old woman. According to the Winnipeg Police Service (WPS), the man and woman met in Winnipeg and later travelled together to Brandon, where she was forced to work as an escort from March 2014 until mid-October. During that time the man would advertise, for a fee, sexual services of the woman, police said, adding he would threaten her with violence if she didn't perform. On one occasion he did physically assault her, police said. Members of the WPS's counter exploitation unit began an investigation in the summer. The man was arrested Nov. 6 in downtown Winnipeg. He is charged with the following offences: Trafficking in persons. Material benefit resulting from trafficking in persons. Living on the avails of prostitution. Assault. Uttering Threats to cause death or bodily harm. Failure to comply with a probation order. Failure to comply with the conditions of an undertaking. He remains in custody. http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manito...-man-1.2827701

In an effort to help everyone stay updated on the Political/Legal issues affecting the Canadian Escort Industry, we're asking for your help in listing Media Items. Please post links to any Industry-related items such as: Articles regarding Backpages, Craigslist Therapeutics and other Escort Advertising venues. Updates regarding changes other Industry Forums have made in response to the new laws. Statements from Police Services in major cities regarding how they plan to interpret and enforce the new laws. Items regarding Police stings, arrests and court cases.

I noticed that in the latest press release regarding the huge nationwide investigation into trafficking of sex workers, they did not give a number as to how many they actually found, which leads me to believe it was none/not many, or they would have been bragging about it. They reported other crimes they found in the process of investigating to justify their efforts. Can't remember the exact article - might have been from Calgary?

You can to listen to, or watch recordings of the Senate Meetings from the last 2 days here: Title LCJC Meeting No. 45 Location Room 257, East Block Event Date Wednesday, Oct 29, 2014 Actual Start Time Wednesday, Oct 29, 04:11 PM EDT Actual End Time Wednesday, Oct 29, 06:22 PM EDT Status Adjourned Description Meeting No. 45 Standing Senate Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs Bill C-36, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (Canada v. Bedford) Edward Herold, Professor Emeritus, University of Guelph (As an Individual) Bernard Lerhe (As an Individual) Barbara Gosse, Senior Director, Research, Policy and Innovation (Canadian Women's Foundation) The Honourable Andrew Swan, M.L.A., Minister of Justice and Attorney General (Government of Manitoba) http://senparlvu.parl.gc.ca/Guide.as...46&Language=E# Title LCJC Meeting No. 46 Location Room 257, East Block Event Date Thursday, Oct 30, 2014 Actual Start Time Thursday, Oct 30, 10:24 AM EDT Actual End Time Thursday, Oct 30, 12:12 PM EDT Status Adjourned Description Meeting No. 46 Standing Senate Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs Bill C-36, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (Canada v. Bedford) Ian M. Carter, Member of the Executive, Criminal Justice Section (Canadian Bar Association) Gunilla S. Ekberg, Lawyer, University of Glasgow School of Law (As an Individual) Gaylene Schellenberg, Lawyer, Legislation and Law Reform (Canadian Bar Association) Consideration of a draft agenda (future business) http://senparlvu.parl.gc.ca/Guide.as...46&Language=E#

Liberal senator to propose changes to controversial new prostitution bill By: Stephanie Levitz, The Canadian Press http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/can...280944432.html OTTAWA - A Liberal senator will propose more amendments to the Conservative government's controversial anti-prostitution bill as the clock ticks down on a court-imposed deadline for implementation of a new law. The Senate has concluded its committee study of Bill C-36 and the bill is expected to be back before the upper chamber for third reading next week. Liberal Sen. George Baker said Thursday he intends to introduce 15 amendments during that debate, all seeking to remove provisions which would criminalize those who sell sex. "We didn't hear from anybody who said that those provisions should be there," he said in an interview. The Conservative government wants to get the bill through the legislative process by the middle of November, so it can get royal assent and become law by December. That would meet the deadline imposed by the Supreme Court of Canada when it struck down existing laws as unconstitutional last year. The court found the laws violated the charter rights of sex workers because they were criminally prohibited from taking measures to keep themselves safe. In response, the government introduced the current bill, which it argues protects sex workers by giving them access to bodyguards and the ability to work indoors. However, none of that can happen if a third party benefits or the sex worker is operating in exploitative conditions. But scores of witnesses told both MPs and senators that the various exemptions in the bill are open to further charter challenges. For example, while the bill would allow sex workers to advertise, it would make it an offence for anyone to run those ads, said Ian Clark, an executive member of the Canadian Bar Association's national criminal justice section. "Therefore, an individual who is attempting to sell their services cannot avail themselves of any advertising, can't screen clients on the Internet, various things that the Supreme Court raised that were important," Clark told the Senate legal affairs committee on Thursday. "This ban on advertising, given the fact that selling remains lawful, is potentially unconstitutional." The bill has already been amended once, to tighten restrictions on where it would be illegal to communicate for the purpose of selling sex. But that provision, as well as any others which continue to criminalize sex work need to be struck out, Baker said. He said he was troubled by testimony from Manitoba's provincial justice minister, who said he would simply tell prosecutors not to proceed with charges in the event prostitutes were arrested under those provisions. That creates an abuse of process, which is a constitutional violation, Baker said. "You'll have somebody arrested, put in jail probably and then no prosecution taking place," he said. "So it's a rather ridiculous situation that those provisions are now in the bill that will create such confusion at the end of the day." For Baker's amendments to pass, he'll need the support of some Conservative senators as their party holds the majority in the Senate. "I think there will be some support there simply because it's a unanimous thing on the part of those who have appeared," he said. Debate over the bill has revealed a split between those who consider sex work a legitimate profession that requires access to safe working conditions and those who see all people working as prostitutes as victims in an industry that needs to be outlawed. But the Senate committee was urged Thursday to consider putting partisan differences aside to reach a compromise on good legislation to protect everyone.

Hey tanya - I'm in the Fraser Valley, just a couple hours east of you. Lots of BC industry people here on cerb. It's good to be part of an online community of like-minded people.

[B]Council blocks new body rub parlours despite warnings from administration[/B] [I]Administration says moratorium could drive sex trade underground[/I] A new temporary moratorium on body rub parlours was approved by Edmonton city council without debate on Wednesday despite warnings from administration that the measure could drive the sex trade underground. The moratorium is in effect until May 1. Coun. Scott McKeen, who pitched the freeze on Oct. 9, said he wants prevent new body rubs parlours from being grandfathered in before members of a task force studying the issue can come up with recommendations. He added the issue is further complicated by the Supreme Court of Canada's decision in December to strike down they country's prostitution laws. â??Itâ??s better to have [the task force] have that time to reflect and review the situation in Canada in regards to the new laws, and see what kind of rules and regulations we can come up with to better protect sex trade workers, and to also include and balance out the needs of the community,â? McKeen said. Administration warned council more escorts applied for licenses the last time the city placed a moratorium on such establishments. They found that more peoiple sought unlicensed escorts on the internet. Mayor Don Iveson said heâ??s not worried. â??The short term unintended consequences I think will be minimal,â? Iveson said. The body rub parlour task force is expected to release recommendations in early 2015. Meanwhile the moratorium will stay in effect until May 1. [URL]http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/council-blocks-new-body-rub-parlours-despite-warnings-from-administration-1.2808218[/URL]

Different personality types enjoy different online environments. Some people like to laugh all day, others prefer to debate. Some use the boards to socialize, some only for research. One thing I have learned throughout the C-36 process, is that we're all better off when we work together, rather than fight against one another. Several times this year - we've been able to make an impact because of our ability to share info on forums across the country. The Happy Hooker campaign, and the amount of emails received by Terri Jean Bedford are proof of that. :D

I'm a member on perb, terb, merb, cerb and caerf. Caerf is definitely the friendliest review board out of them all. I haven't participated much here other than to post articles on C-36 but I enjoy the friendly atmosphere here too. When I was still working as a SP in BC, perb was the best place to advertise. One positive benefit from dealing with C-36 is that perb/terb/merb are communicating and sharing info between boards instead of operating as totally separate entities.

It'd be interesting to dig into the ownership of all Canadian media reporting on C-36, to see who really owns them and who influences them. I looked into Black Press, who owns many newspapers in BC/AB/USA, and they are owned and supported by conservative, evangelical Christians. Escorts haven't been allowed to post online ads in their classifieds (BCclassified.com) since they began operating online, although they still allow non-explicit print ads afaik. Expect them to clamp down heavily when the new law comes into effect.

Yes, I remember that happening when I signed another petition earlier this year, and people need to uncheck the box if they don't want their signature published online. Also: Online petitions are NOT accepted by the house. It is only admissible in original hard copy. Guidelines here: http://elizabethmaymp.ca/wp-content/uploads/bill-c-36-prostitution-petition.pdf?7a6943

Police in Ontario say the gang known as North Preston's Finest is actively recruiting girls and women from the Maritimes, forcing them into a life of prostitution in cities across Canada. The notorious gang, with roots in the small Nova Scotia community of North Preston, northeast of Halifax, was first identified by police in Toronto in the early 1990s. Det. Thai Truong of York Regional Police, north of Toronto, said it's common to run into pimps who say they're from North Preston or have ties to North Preston, and women who've been moved from the Maritimes to regions around Toronto. "We're seeing a lot of girls, and we have seen a lot of victims that are from the East Coast and the pimps that are controlling them are from the East Coast," Truong said. The women are recruited in the Maritimes and then quickly moved, he said. "Once the girls are recruited, the Scotian or the pimp is generally, or typically, not going to be pimping her out from where she's from," Truong said. "He's going to be taking her out of her own jurisdiction, out of her comfort zone, where her family is, her friends are. Any social supports she may have. He's going to move her west and essentially they find their way... a lot of the time in Ontario and" the Greater Toronto Area, he said. The detective said that makes it especially difficult for police in Nova Scotia and other Maritime provinces to address the problem. "Their hands are sort of tied," he said, because while the women and girls are recruited in the Maritimes, they are being moved and the offences are compounding in other jurisdictions. Gina, whose real name CBC News agreed to withhold for her safety, said she was lured into prostitution by a member of North Preston's Finest when she was 15 years old. She was living on the streets of Toronto when, she said, a man from North Preston offered her a better life. "He painted me a picture of what I can have, like freedom of money and financial freedom and I would have everything I needed and wanted," she said. "And it all sounded really good to me because that's why I came to Toronto, because I wanted to succeed in doing something." For the next six years, Gina said, she was frequently beaten and forced to sell her body for sex. "First, they treat you nice and everything, but then it happens with just a slap in the face," she said. "A simple slap in the face, to using objects, to dragging you and degrading you and saying 'get naked, you stink.' Mental abuse, physical abuse, verbal abuse, lots of different types of abuses happen, but it starts small and it escalates." She said she was just one in what she calls a "stable" of women. "It was normal. I even brought women home myself. If he couldn't get them, I would bring them home or get their numbers, either way. Yeah, I was totally involved in him bringing women home." Gina said she eventually managed to leave her pimp, but only after paying a $15,000 "leaving fee." Truong said police don't know for sure how many people are involved with North Preston's Finest. He said it's one of a number of groups trafficking women in the Toronto area and across the country. He said prostitution is a lucrative business and pimps can make more money from trafficking women than selling cocaine or guns. http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-s...lice-1.2791599

Oct 07, 2014 13:15 ET Last week, police services across Canada participated in a two-day blitz focusing on the growing concern that women are being forced to participate in the sex trade. Operation Northern Spotlight II involved 26 police services on October 1 and 2, 2014 and was centered around hotels and motels on major thoroughfares in 28 cities and towns across the country. A total of 167 police officers and support staff took part and 257 people were interviewed including a 12-year-old girl in Winnipeg. Police found some were being forced to perform sexual acts, multiple times a day, for paying male customers. Nine people were arrested across Canada and face charges including: Exercise Control, Make Child Pornography, Distribute Child Pornography, Forcible Confinement, Trafficking in Persons, Material Benefit, Withhold or Destroy Documents, Living off the Avails of Prostitution, Assault, Procuring, Utter Threats, Obstruct Police and Breach of Recognizance and Probation. In Durham Region, officers interviewed 31 sex trade workers, with an average age of 26, and investigators believe nine were under some level of control. These 31 people represent the highest total for any police service during Operation Northern Spotlight II. Although the Criminal Code section refers to this activity as Human Trafficking, the public may better understand this issue as sex slavery. Although many of the women appear to be making their own decisions to participate for financial gain, investigators found several teenagers and young women were being forced to perform through threats of violence, physical intimidation, drug dependency and other forms of coercion. Part or all of the proceeds from the sexual encounters were kept by their adult male controller or pimp. Police Services will continue to monitor any incidents of forced participation in hopes of assisting any woman involved in the sex trade business against her will. The following police services participated in this phase of Operation Northern Spotlight: Barrie Police Service; Brantford Police Service; Durham Regional Police; Halton Regional Police; Hamilton Police Service; Kingston Police Service; RCMP Kitchener; London Police Service; Peel Regional Police Service; Peterborough-Lakefield Community Police Service; Port Hope Police Service; Toronto Police Service; Waterloo Regional Police Service; Windsor Police Service; OPP; Calgary Police Service; Edmonton Police Service; Lethbridge Alberta Law Enforcement Response Team [ALERT]; Regina Police Service; Saskatoon Police Service; Winnipeg Police Service; RCMP Exploited Persons Pro-active Strategy (EPPS); Gatineau Police; Ville de Quebec Police; Halifax Regional Police and RCMP Halifax. If you have information about any person being coerced into the sex trade, please contact your local police service. Read more here: http://www.drps.ca/internet_explorer/whatsnew/whatsnew_view.asp?Related_With=Top_Story&Scope=&Scope_ID=&ID=28758

Bill C-36 passes third reading in the House by a vote of 156 to 124. Next step: the Senate

Third reading of Bill C-36 today. http://www.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?Pub=projected&Language=E&Mode=1&Parl=41&Ses=2

I'm surprised that sex worker org's don't use the boards to promote their projects more often. There's a combined membership of half a million industry people on the Canadian forums, and that's not counting the hundreds of thousands of lurkers who read the forums regularly.

A repost on Sean Casey (the Liberal MP)'s website of an article published on Monday by the Hills Times, which was only available through subscription: THE HILL TIMES: Fedsâ?? anti-prostitution legislation â??destinedâ?? for a legal challenge, could take years POSTED ON SEPTEMBER 29, 2014 By Rachel Aiello Published September 29th, 2014 [URL="http://seancasey.liberal.ca/communications/sean-in-the-news/hill-times-feds-antiprostitution-legislation-destined-legal-challenge-years/"]http://seancasey.liberal.ca/communications/sean-in-the-news/hill-times-feds-antiprostitution-legislation-destined-legal-challenge-years/[/URL] The longer would-be challengers of the Conservativesâ?? controversial anti-prostitution legislation, Bill C-36, wait to go to court following its implementation, the better chance the case will have at succeeding, legal experts say, agreeing that a challenge is forthcoming. â??Itâ??s quite possible that the very first guy arrested under the purchase or pimping law will decide to launch a constitutional challenge. They could absolutely do that and it could happen two weeks after the law is passed,â? said Janine Benedet, associate law professor at the University of British Columbia, who testified at both the House and Senate committee hearings this summer, and represented the Womenâ??s Coalition for the Abolition of Prostitution at the Ontario Court of Appeal stage, and is generally in support of the bill. A new challenge would have to focus on the life and times of purchasers, whereas the Bedford case was all about the life and times of sex workers, said Alan Young, lead counsel in Canada vs. Bedford and an associate professor at York Universityâ??s Osgoode Hall Law School. Prof. Young said he hasnâ??t decided yet whether it is best to put this legislation â??out of its misery quicklyâ? so that a â??constitutionally soundâ? piece of legislation could be introduced, or to bide time â??because we donâ??t want to have a premature challenge that will be unsuccessful, preventing other people from raising claims for another two decades.â? Carissima Mathen, an associate professor of law at the University of Ottawa and a constitutional and criminal law expert, said the bill asymmetrically criminalizes one side of a transaction that requires two people. â??It is a very unusual piece of legislation that is trying to respond to the Supreme Court of Canadaâ??s decision on Bedford but it also in a way is trying to change the terms of the debate,â? she said. Bill C-36, the Protection of Communities and Exploited Persons Act, or â??An Act to amend the Criminal Code in response to the Supreme Court of Canada decision in Attorney General of Canada v. Bedford and to make consequential amendments to other Acts,â? was introduced by Justice Minister Peter MacKay (Central Nova, N.S.) and first read in the House on June 4. There were special committee hearings this summer, and the Senateâ??s Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee came back early to host pre-study hearings, working to have the new law in place before the existing legislation expires Dec. 20. The bill is awaiting final approval in the House and could be sent to the Senate this week. The bill would amend the Criminal Code to prohibit purchasing sexual services or communicating in any place for that purpose, and prohibit benefiting from the sale of a sexual service. The only substantive amendment made following the House hearings was to define the public places where people under the age of 18 could be as being open to public view, next to a school, playground or daycare. There are no definite plans to challenge it yet but Prof. Young told The Hill Times there are a lot of people interested. Caroline Newcastle, a sex worker and spokesperson for Prostitutes of Ottawa-Gatineau Work, Educate and Resist (POWER), also said she has not heard of any explicit plans to form a challenge, but said it is inevitable as this bill reproduces many of the dangers struck down in Bedford. â??Some of us will die as a result of this legislation,â? she said, adding that the bill impacts sex workersâ?? ability to safely screen clients and makes them more vulnerable without the ability to legally hire protection. She also said prohibiting them from being able to advertise their services explicitly will affect their ability to communicate the line of consent. â??I expect that by 2015 a legal challenge will have been commenced and if a legal challenge isnâ??t commenced, it will be not long after that,â? said Liberal Justice critic Sean Casey (Charlottetown, P.E.I.). Independant Newfoundland Liberal Senator George Baker, a member of the Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee set to study the bill, agreed. â??It seems destined for a constitutional challenge,â? he said in an interview with The Hill Times. The committee still plans to hold more hearings, he said, but they â??might not be very extensive,â? before Bill C-36 is passed in its current form. He said he doesnâ??t think it is possible to amend the legislation enough to make it acceptable constitutionally. â??Listening to Parliament [say] that youâ??re going to make a provision for a prostitute to carry on her activity or his activity of prostitutionâ?¦while at the same time you make a declaration that the act of prostitution is illegal for the first time in Canadian history-a reasonable person would say that is completely contradictory. Why doesnâ??t Parliament just make up its mind? If theyâ??re going to make it illegal, make it illegal; if theyâ??re going to make it legal, make it legal. Itâ??s a very complicated piece of legislation,â? he said. NDP MP Françoise Boivin (Gatineau, Que.), her partyâ??s justice critic and outspoken opponent of the legislation, said it would be important to watch and learn from the provinces how the courts interpret and the police forces implement the legislation after itâ??s passed because itâ??s ultimately their jurisdiction to administer. She said it would be interesting to approach groups impacted by the new laws after the next federal election, scheduled for Oct. 19, 2015, to see â??how it was lived.â? The bill was debated in the House on Sept. 22 after the House Justice Committeeâ??s report was presented in the House a week before. Prior to the debate, the Speaker read out the notice of motions made. There were 52, all from Green Party Leader Elizabeth May (Saanich-Gulf Islands, B.C), who had placed the motions in an attempt to delete the bill in its entirety. Like both Mr. Casey and Ms. Boivin, she said it was beyond amending and destined for a constitutional challenge. Legal experts said a new court challenge could take anywhere between two and 10 years, with it most likely to take three to five years to make its way through the courts and appeal process. Itâ??s thought that any new challenge will be slightly shorter than the six years it took for Bedford from filing to completion, because the comprehensive information and evidence compiled in that case will still be applicable for reference in a new challenge. There are two options for a court challenge: either a criminal case or a civil proceeding like Bedford. Prof. Young, associate professor at York Universityâ??s Osgoode Hall Law School, said it isnâ??t clear yet what the exact nature of the challenge will be, or which area of the legislation it would focus on, but a criminal challenge would be the form more likely to come first. All experts agreed that although the existing thousands of pages of evidence will help form a case, if they were to be the constitutional litigator, theyâ??d like the time to gather new evidence to demonstrate how the new law is impacting sex workers and purchasers and to make realistic conclusions. By the time Bedford was being argued in the Ontario Court of Appeal in 2011, there was plenty of new and interesting evidence both in Canada and internationally that couldnâ??t be referred to because the 88 volumes of evidence collected for the case was compiled in 2005, said Prof. Benedet. The big question now is how long it will take to build up the evidence that the claimants feel is sufficient to be successful, because as Mr. Baker pointed out, civil challenges, if lost, can be very expensive. Prof. Young said that he has had conversations with the three Bedford plaintiffs-Amy Lebovitch, Terri-Jean Bedford and Valerie Scott-and other sex workers involved in the case, but he hasnâ??t made any concrete plans to represent a case again. â??Weâ??ve reached a situation where everybody is knocking on the door thinking, â??I should be the next one to do this,â?? and thatâ??s good but itâ??s also bad if itâ??s done precipitously,â? he said. It is possible that having multiple challenges across provinces could compel the federal government to send a reference to the Supreme Court, which is the second option available, and discussed by all the legal experts and opposition parties The Hill Times spoke with. A federal or provincial government could send a reference to the Supreme Court of Canada or a provincial Superior Court or Queenâ??s Bench, in which they could pose a question or questions to the court about the constitutionality of various points of the bill and allow the court to declare its constitutionality. This reference could be initiated at any time, when the law is at any stage of the lawmaking process. If they deemed the bill, or portions of it, unconstitutional, it would give Parliament another opportunity to come up with a piece of legislation that conforms with the Charter. Itâ??s an option that could move very quickly, as seen with the government asking the Supreme Court to determine whether C-7, the bill to allow for Senate term limits, was constitutional. But the current government has made it clear it isnâ??t interested in pursuing that option, so the earliest a reference could come up would be after the October 2015 election. Itâ??s something the Justice critics have alluded to. â??I think that any responsible government now or after 2015 should save all of the parties the time and expenses associated with a challenge to this legislation and refer it to the Supreme Court,â? said Mr. Casey. Legal experts, though, are hesitant to declare this the best option. While it does have value in potentially expediting a process if the Supreme Court invalidates or modifies the legislation, preventing Charter rights being broken in the meantime, references are done on argument as opposed to on legislative fact evidence, which could result in a decontextualized decision, baring little weight over the initial question sought to be answered, said Prof. Young. â??I do believe the flaws in the law, some are apparent on the face of the statutes and some will only emerge with time as we see how the law is being applied and implemented in communities.â? Prof. Benedet said that the government has to have the time to enact the social supports and programs that coincide with the bill, like the $20-million over five years the Conservatives have pledged to aid with sex workersâ?? exit strategies from the industry, to evaluate the overall effectiveness. â??The law alone is not going to make it effective. You need programs that are both deterring entry into prostitution and programs on the other end that are providing women with viable alternatives for a source of income,â? she said. The piece was originally published here: [URL="http://www.hilltimes.com/news/news/2014/09/29/feds-anti-prostitution-legislation-destined-for-a-legal-challenge-could-take-years/39745"]http://www.hilltimes.com/news/news/2014/09/29/feds-anti-prostitution-legislation-destined-for-a-legal-challenge-could-take-years/39745[/URL]

This was originally posted by Susie on perb and I have reposted it here with her permission. Susan Davis, British Columbia Coalition of Experimental Communities Dear Susan, I am writing to many of the groups and persons who have stood with Valerie, Amy, me and our legal team against the prostitution laws that were struck down. These groups and persons have voiced their support in so many ways and their messages were heard across the country again and again. I thank all of you for that support. I have done so in person when able. The new law, Bill C-36 is of course an outrage. It will of course fail before the courts, fail in its implementation, and in the process its supporters will again be discredited. You and all the others have already been to helping to ensure that failure will happen. Recently I testified before the Senate and in the question period after opening statements I was ejected. This got a lot of attention. One of the things I said, which also got much attention, was that I would expose some clients of sex workers. Everyone thought I meant politicians who supported C-36. I have an advisory group working on the legalities and mechanics of that process. Part of that process, if in fact I do follow though, is determining what sex workers think about exposing some clients, and I am writing to ask you to tell me what you think. Please ask your colleagues to tell me as well by sending me an e-mail at the address below. One reason for exposing some clients is to show how unfair the law is when sex workers can report clients to the police and only the client is charged. This means, it would seem, that blackmail and entrapment have largely been legalized. This would probably add fuel to constitutional challenges. Professor Young also pointed out at the Senate that immunity from prosecution has until now only been given by prosecutors, not in legislation, as C-36 does. So exposing clients would show how irrational the law is, as well as illegal itself. exposing would probably also add this fuel as well to constitutional challenges. Another obvious reason for exposing is to show the hypocrisy of those who want to impose their will on others while themselves engaging in the very behaviour they want to others to stop. Yet another reason is to ensure the public remains aware of this issue and of the dangers and are unfair hardships the government's approach would create for those in the sex trade. Nothing attracts media attention as much as politics combined with scandals of this kind. I could mention other reasons, but enough for now. However, concerns come to mind too. Does exposing set a bad precedent for the sex trade overall, even if the law is not implemented to any extent or frozen in the courts right away? What other negative repercussions there be for sex workers if I did release part or all of my list? What would the consequences be if I just released one or two or a few names? What should be the criteria for names chosen for release? Would you and your members and colleagues prefer me to back off exposing clients altogether, and if so why? I seek your help in answering these questions. Please share this with all you wish to share it with. I will read all e-mails sent to me and take all advice very seriously when I decide what to do. I appreciate that feedback every bit as much as the support shown over these years which, I say yet again, I am sincerely grateful for. Yours truly, Terri-Jean Bedford Email your replies to [email protected] .

According to Françoise Boivin, from the NDP, the next steps for C-36 are few hours of debate on Friday for the 3rd reading, and then final vote at the Hoc next week: #C36 Vote étape du rapport. Ne restera que quelques hrs de débat en 3ième lecture vendredi et vote la semaine prochaine. #polcan #Bedford https://twitter.com/FBoivinNPD/statu...18774603759616 A motion, at the Report Stage, to delete the Bill was just defeated by the Cons. https://twitter.com/Mercedes_Allen/s...19738727055360

7 years isn't exactly a life sentence is it? I feel for her family.

[I]Rachel Browne talks to researchers behind five-year study[/I] Rachel Browne September 23, 2014 Earlier this year, Justice Minister Peter MacKay promised that Bill C-36 would eradicate prostitution in Canada and protect the most vulnerable in the sex industry by â??going after the perpetrators, the perverts, those who are consumers of this degrading practice.â? Despite criticism and repeated calls for the bill to be withdrawn, it will likely become law before the governmentâ??s December deadline. Sex workers are concerned for their future. And while the billâ??s opponents voiced their concerns even before it was tabled, they havenâ??t had much influence on it. Researchers from around the world are in Ottawa this week to hear findings from the first national study on Canadaâ??s sex industry that seriously undermine the billâ??s assumptions that most people who sell sex are victims and those who buy sex are fiends. While the study is unlikely to influence the new legislation, it provides rare insight into the lives of Canadians who buy and sex sell. It also adds to the body of evidence available for the inevitable Charter challenge. â??Sex workers are average Canadians. Theyâ??re Caucasian, in their 30s and 40s, and have education and training outside of high school. Most of them donâ??t feel exploited, they donâ??t see buyers as oppressors,â? the studyâ??s lead author Cecilia Benoit, a researcher at the Centre for Addictions Research of British Columbia, told Macleanâ??s. â??Theyâ??re not weird, unusual people. They are people trying to do the best they can with the tools they have to live their lives.â? The five-year study began in 2011 and is funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. Researchers interviewed 218 sex workers, 1,252 clients, 30 spouses or intimate partners of sex workers, 61 managers of escort or massage businesses, and 80 law enforcement officials. The interviewees were from six cities: St. Johnâ??s, N.L., Montreal, Kitchener, Ont., Fort McMurray, Alta., and Victoria. Throughout the justice committee hearings on Bill C-36 in July, the billâ??s supporters claimed the average age of entry into the sex industry is between 14 and 16. For the sex workers in this study, the average age was 24; 29 per cent of the sex workers interviewed said they had engaged in sex work before they turned 19. And while 43 per cent of the sex workers said they were satisfied with their work and 82 per cent felt appropriately rewarded, about one third of those surveyed reported having negative childhood experiences, and the same number grew up in foster care or other child services. The research team plans to examine the link between childhood abuse and the sex industry. Benoit, who has spent decades researching the sex industry, says she was struck by the interviews she and her husband, fellow researcher Mikael Jansson, did together with the sex workers and their spouses or partners. â??I realized just how similar they were to us,â? she says. â??They were dealing with the constraints of life, trying to support each other.â? More than half of the sex workers in the study were in â??significant intimate relationships,â? and 59 of them were married or living in common-law marriages. Almost half the clients reported being married or in a common-law marriage with a non-sex worker. Many of the interviews were conducted shortly after the Supreme Court struck down the criminal code provisions on prostitution last year. â??People in the industry felt a little bit more at ease then, [and] open to tell us what they were doing,â? says Benoit. Sheâ??s worried the new laws criminalizing buyers and advertising will push swaths of the industry underground. â??It will be harder for clients to help anyone they see being victimized, because it will be illegal. The same with managers in the industry,â? she says. â??Iâ??m a bit sad about what is going to happen.â? Canadians should also be worried that C-36 makes sex workers targets, says Chris Atchison, a sociologist from the University of Victoria who contributed to the study. â??We see exacerbation of conflict and unsafe sex practices when we force people to engage in hostile, criminalized climates,â? he says. Clients, or â??johns,â? in Canada represent all strata of life, so when we adhere to stereotypes, it ignores the diversity of the population and glosses over the bad apples, he says. And the small number of people who prey on the vulnerable in the sex industry will have greater cover, because johns wonâ??t be willing to divulge their anonymity once it becomes illegal to buy sex. â??People who are raping and murdering sex workers, theyâ??re not clients,â? Atchison says. â??Nobody murders a sex worker and then puts $500 down on her corpse.â? Jean McDonald, director of sex-worker support group Maggieâ??s Toronto, says although C-36 is very similar to the provisions struck down by Bedford, her group is coming up with new ways to navigate the changing industry. Sheâ??s also confident some police forces will continue to leave sex workers and their clients alone. â??There are some police services, such as in Peterborough, Ont., who, for the last 10 years, have made a point of having a policy of non-enforcement of prostitution laws,â? she says. â??There is that shimmer of hope I have.â? This is reflected in the report, which finds that police and municipal approaches to sex workers and johns are highly inconsistent across the country. Calgary Police Chief Rick Hanson applauds Bill C-36, for example, whereas Victoria police officers shy away from arresting those engaging in prostitution. The Victoria municipal council recently passed a resolution urging the federal government to abandon C-36. One Montreal police officer told report authors that his force focuses instead on â??other crimes that are more serious, such as the trafficking of crack cocaine and the trafficking of firearms.â? Even if prostitution were decriminalized, which the report authors and those interviewed say ought to happen, Benoit says that wouldnâ??t be enough to make the lives of those in the industry better. â??We need societal change, not just at the federal level. We need to change at a more personal level by examining our attitudes and how we discriminate against people,â? she says. [URL="http://www.macleans.ca/news/canada/first-national-prostitution-study-sheds-new-light-on-sex-work-in-canada/"]http://www.macleans.ca/news/canada/first-national-prostitution-study-sheds-new-light-on-sex-work-in-canada/[/URL]

Vancouver East Liberals will host town hall meeting on Bill C-36, which criminalizes prostitution by CHARLIE SMITH on SEP 22, 2014 at 4:57 PM http://www.straight.com/news/734206/vancouver-east-liberals-will-host-town-hall-meeting-bill-c-36-which-criminalizes-prostitution MORE THAN THREE months ago, I suggested that Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau was the only hope for sex workers. It came in the wake of the Conservative government unveiling Bill C-36, which criminalizes the customers of sex workers. Some commenters on this website ripped into me for suggesting that Trudeau would do this. After all, Trudeau has previously supported the Nordic model, which also criminalizes the client. My response is that Trudeau changed his views on marijuana. There's no reason he wouldn't reverse his position on prostitution if there were sufficient public support and if evidence led the Liberals in that direction. The research by SFU's John Lowman and others is already clear. Sex workers' lives are jeopardized when the state drives their industry underground. That's why the Supreme Court of Canada concluded that Criminal Code prohibitions on soliciting clients in public, keeping a common bawdy house, and living off the avails of prostitution are unconstitutional. The government's response, Bill C-36, might as well be called the Willie Pickton Law. That's because it will make it easier for predators to kill sex workers after the Harperites have once again pushed sex workers to the margins. I'm surprised that Justice Minister Peter MacKay would countenance something like this, but who knows what's going on his brain? This week, the Vancouver East Liberals have announced that they will host a town hall meeting on Bill C-36. It suggests that the party has an open mind on this issue. Door open at 6:30 p.m. at the Strathcona Community Centre on Thursday (September 25). The panel features sex-workers' advocate Jamie Lee Hamilton, Vancouver park commissioner Sarah Blyth, and UBC researcher Becki Ross. It's taking place in the riding of NDP MP Libby Davies, who's long been an advocate for increasing sex workers' safety. In 2002, Davies introduced a motion in Parliament to review prostitution laws. That was the same year that Pickton was charged with 26 murders. Late last year, Davies issued a statement welcoming the Supreme Court of Canada's ruling striking down three sections of the Criminal Code. "The exploitation, murder and violence against sex trade workers in Canada happens at an alarming rate, and until today, the laws dealing with prostitution remained unchanged and governments remained unwilling to realistically deal with this growing public safety issue," she said. "These laws have been a failure, both from the perspective of assisting and protecting sex workers as well as in mitigating the impacts of street prostitution on local communities." Davies also spoke at a rally this year opposing Bill C-36. So why is Justin Trudeau and not NDP leader Tom Mulcair the only hope for sex workers? It's because most of Davies' colleagues in Parliament have been silent on this issue. And if the NDP forms government, there's no guarantee that it will reverse the criminalization of customers and other unconstitutional aspects of Bill C-36 until Mulcair delivers an unequivocal statement on this issue. It's fine and dandy for him to stand up in Parliament and put the government's feet to the fire with regard to Senate expenses. But Bill C-36 is legislation that will result in people dying unnecessarily. Why isn't the Opposition leader putting as much energy into this? In the meantime, the federal Liberals are seeking public input. That's the first step along the road to developing better policies. It's why I still believe that Justin Trudeau is the only hope for sex workers. Follow Charlie Smith on Twitter @csmithstraight. ***************************** May says prostitution bill is 'unfixable' http://www.torontosun.com/2014/09/22/may-says-prostitution-bill-is-unfixable OTTAWA -- Green Party Leader Elizabeth May said the government prostitution Bill C-36 is "unfixable." "I couldn't find a way to amend the bill and actually fix it," she said, recommending the bill be ditched entirely. The controversial legislation was back to the House of Commons for a final review Monday, so opposition MPs from all parties had one final chance to weigh in. The Supreme Court last December ruled Canada's existing laws on the world's oldest profession were unconstitutional and ordered Parliament to come up with something new. Initiated by Justice Minister Peter MacKay, the overarching theme behind the bill is to criminalize the purchase of sex, but not its sale. Though he's been criticized for it, MacKay has stated he believes his "made-in-Canada" approach is the best step toward the "aspirational" goal of eliminating prostitution altogether.

Consistent with her position on C-36, Elizabeth May, leader of the Green Party, has just introduced to the House of Commons motions which would in effect get rid of the Bill as a whole: http://www.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?Pub=NoticeOrder&Mode=1&Language=E&Parl=41&Ses=2&File=12 Anyone interested in following the progress of the Bill, can track it here: http://www.parl.gc.ca/LEGISInfo/BillDetails.aspx?Language=E&Mode=1&billId=6635303 Hamilton SIU to investigate Hamilton cop who preyed on sex workers Sept. 15/14 Ottawa Ottawa mayor candidate Darren Wood: legalize bordellos, tax sex workers Sept. 11/14

The Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network has posted on its website its brief to Senate: http://www.aidslaw.ca/publications/interfaces/downloadFile.php?ref=2297 Brief to the Senate Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs regarding Bill C-36, the Protection of Communities and Exploited Persons Act This brief compares the Criminal Code provisions proposed by Bill C-36 against the Criminal Code provisions struck down by the Supreme Court of Canada in R v. Bedford. It explains how the new law, if enacted, will replicate the effects of the old law on the security of sex workers and, as such, reproduce the harms the Supreme Court of Canada found to be unconstitutional. It further explains how these harms also constitute violations of international human rights law and how criminalization of sex work undermines the global response to the HIV/AIDS epidemics. Finally, it issues a recommendation for Bill C-36 to be rejected in its entirety.