MP Bids to Make Buying Sex Illegal in Canada

[BootyLoving 2441]

Its ok to sell guns - it's illegal to shoot it.

Its ok to sell drugs - its illegal to consume it.

Its ok to sell sex - it's illegal to buy it.

 

Makes a whole lot of backwards sense to me.

 

Its just messing with your populations' mind. The Swed law makers are just sick in the head.

 

I'll be selling pies at Parliment Hill, just you people need to remember, you can't throw it at a politician! ... Seriously, its waste of good food.

[HappyJay 154]

I totally agree with what you have said. Well done!

The following are pieces of the an article regarding the pros and cons of the Swedish model of prostitution law.

 

It?s not uncommon for women in low paying service and secretarial jobs to turn tricks on the weekends or for a women trying to put herself through university to free lance dance at her local strip club. Stripping, writing pornography, nude photos, internet webcams, porn films, escort services, massage parlours, phone sex, peep shows, personals ads, street prostitution ? you name it, it?s a women dominant business; it?s also one of the only businesses where women can make more than men.

 

Swedish supporters argue that the new system has sponsored more collaboration between the police and social services and therefore more sensitive treatment of prostitutes. While this might be the case in some instances, violence from clients has reportedly increased. A recent Norwegian government sponsored study found that in Sweden, "? violence is an everyday occurrence for women involved in prostitution. Women tell of violence in the form of major attacks, rape, threats with knives and with being locked up. Obviously, being locked up for very serious offences.

 

Proponents of the Swedish model argue that women are more likely to report crimes such as these to the police. Swedish sex work activist Rosinha Sambo, on the other hand, dismisses this outright and claims that sex workers are actually less likely to call the police because if fellow workers and clients find out, the prostitute will become stigmatized and clients will be afraid to visit her.

 

Prostitutes talk of the new tougher existence that they face on the streets. The decreasing numbers of clients (through fear of arrest and clients seeking prostitutes in neighbouring countries) creates a more competitive market where women need to reduce their rates and are more likely to agree to sex without protection. Reports also indicate that due to the negative social stigma attached to prostitution and the greater risks for the clients, the so-called more ?normal? clients (i.e. non-abusive men looking for fairly straight sex) are no longer purchasing services and what?s left are the aggressive men who are interested in rough sex and other higher risk behaviours . Women are also forced to make split second decisions about whether to accept a client?s offer as any conversation in public could lead to his arrest. This effectively puts women in the situation of having to protect her clients and doesn?t allow her the necessary time to assess the situation using her learned intuition to get a sense of her safety.

 

Effectively, Swedish prostitutes and others are arguing that since the laws on the purchasing of sexual services have come into play prices for services have decreased, sex without condoms and violence have increased, clients are forced to go to neighbouring states, and the industry has been pushed further underground.

 

The Swedish system seems to be working fine for politicians and the feminist movement but reportedly not for the sex workers.

The implications of having a criminal record for prostitution-related offences can have a devastating effect on people's lives, preventing them, for example, from getting a job once they decide to leave the trade.

 

The incidents of street prostitution (or at least it visibility) has plummeted since the introduction of the tough prostitution laws in Sweden, though such statistics are being argued. Same argument exists for human trafficking as the criminal are now seeking easier markets like neighbouring countries.

 

My views:

 

I believe that both the Swedish model of prostitution law and the liberal German/Dutch prostitution laws are unworkable and not proper for Canada or anywhere else. I believe while governments must combat the dark aspects of prostitution more vigorously and must put aside sufficient funding and law enforcement resources to fight off forced prostitution, underage prostitution, pimping and human trafficking as well as legislating harsh (up to several years) for human sex traffickers especially those pimping and forcing the underage as well as those clients who knowingly hire the underage or forced prostitutes, however, the voluntary prostitution between consenting adult should be likely legalized and regulated. Those who want a change or out must be supported socially and financially and special government sponsored programs must be introduced to assist those sex workers for their safe transition to a new profession. Sex workers must be able to report violent clients as well as pimps to law enforcement without the fear of being prosecuted. A media campaign must commence to educate the public about sex workers and remove the stigma associated with sex workers and their profession in our society.

 

The fact remains that though likely most street sex workers are forced into prostitution (by their pimps or needs like drug addictions,?) however, there are also many other sex workers (mostly using internet and review boards) who voluntarily have chosen the profession and who are working in a clean safe environment and enjoying their work too and the law must separate between the two. Bringing harsh punishment for both types of prostitution is unfair, illogical, undemocratic, counter-productive and totally unacceptable in progressive societies such as Canada. It only serves the politicians to show off their good face or intentions and feminists who have clearly misunderstood the meaning of feminism which is about equality not unequal treatment of sexes when sex workers (overwhelming majority are women) are free from prosecution and their clients (overwhelming majority are men) are being harshly prosecuted.

 

Additional Comments:

You said it! Exactly to the point!

Why does no one see the complete ridiculousness of the Swedish model?

 

If prostitution is violence towards the sex worker him/herself, then why is it still okay to sell sex? And since when does it make any sense to criminalize the buyer?

 

The Swedish model went into place without any consultation with sex workers, and in the official Swedish language, they do not make any distinction between forced and voluntary, all prostitution is understood as violence against women. They claim to be the most gender neutral, feminist country, but they did not even consider speaking to the sex workers themselves. The Swedish model is yet another example of policy and law makers deciding what is best for us, and treating us like children.

 

In the first year, police used video cameras to collect evidence and harass clients, which meant they had to film both the exchange of money and the sex itself and many workers felt that even though they weren't doing anything illegal, this was being used to violate their integrity.

 

The street clients become more stressed and want to complete the negotiation process as quickly as possible to avoid getting caught and it becomes difficult to assess if the person is a good client if she is supposed to just jump into the car without any negotiation.

 

Many of the "good" clients have turned to indoor workers to avoid getting caught, leaving the street workers to deal with the clients who don't care about getting caught, usually because they already have a criminal record. Prior to the law criminalizing clients, they could refuse these clients, but now they cannot afford to. It comes as no surprise then that they are exposed to more violence now.

 

The decrease in the number of clients for street workers has made them more desperate and more likely to accept unsafe sex practices. And since the police look for condoms as evidence of sex, this is a strong incentive not to carry condoms.

 

So basically, the Swedish model sucks and only forces prostitution further underground. Give your head a shake lady (Joy Smith), you don't know what the fuck you're talking about.

[Guest s******ecan****]

Excellent update WIT, perhaps my well known and well voiced pessimism is unwarranted. I'm impressed the NDP and Liberal representatives came out so strongly in favour of the rights of sex workers which seems to suggest that they are open to some form of legalization. I also note how they have clearly identified and criticized the Harper's cynical and deliberate conflating of trafficking and prostitution.

 

It was also interesting to see a positive comments on the after effects of the NZ and Australian models.

[Capital Hunter 18263]

Yes excellent update. Thanks for being over the subject continiously WIT.

 

Yes a very nice surprise from the NDP and as expected a measured logical response by liberals. Not sure where the Bloc are standing on the issue as usual they are Vague!!!. Right now it appears Canada is spared from Swedish epidemy, however, I continue to caution readers to be vigilant in the next election. A conservative majority can really turn clocks back by decades. There are many Joy Smiths in that party with a hidden agenda.

[Guest W***ledi*Time]

Dale Smith reports for Xtra!, 22 Oct 2010:

 

http://www.xtra.ca/public/National/Ignatieff_wants_to_find_balance_on_Canadas_sex_work_laws-9331.aspx

At Thursday?s "Open Mike" town hall in Ottawa, Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff took unscripted questions from audience members on a variety of subjects.

 

Afterward, he held a media availability for reporters, at which point

Xtra

asked him about his position on the Ontario Superior Court decision which struck down prostitution laws in the province.

 

"It?s being appealed, and all I feel about it is there is a balance, which I see in my own constituency," Ignatieff says. "Families in family areas are very concerned about the public nuisance and public disorder that happens with prostitution ? I?ve seen it in my own riding.

 

"On the other hand, the same families are concerned about the safety, the physical safety, of sex workers. That?s the balance we have to find. I?m not going to say whether that court got it right ? that?s not my job. My job is then, if the government appeals, and there?s a decision and has to be new legislation, we?ll look at the new legislation with that balance in mind, because that?s the balance that Canadians want us to keep."

 

[Guest s******ecan****]

"On the other hand, the same families are concerned about the safety, the physical safety, of sex workers. That?s the balance we have to find. I?m not going to say whether that court got it right ? that?s not my job. My job is then, if the government appeals, and there?s a decision and has to be new legislation, we?ll look at the new legislation with that balance in mind, because that?s the balance that Canadians want us to keep."

 

 

Thanks WIT. This is very encouraging news. The fact that the Leader of the Opposition has staked out a clear position that also seems to reflect what the majority of us in the community feel as well is good news indeed. You're turning me into a very cautious optimist.

[SamanthaEvans 166767]

Coming late into this discussion, I very much appreciate what everyone has already said.

 

I am sick and tired of the anti-sex "feminists" who presume to make definitions and state so-called norms and standards about women and about sex workers without consulting women like us, who are in the business by choice. Their attitudes about us are not only paternalistic, but they're also dehumanizing. I refuse to accept the notion that I am somehow deficient or ignorant or mind-controlled because I am a prostitute. That's utter nonsense. I also refuse to accept the claim that normal, healthy women do not enjoy having sex with strangers or having multiple partners. I'm normal and very healthy and I'm having a very good time. Safely, too!

 

I think it's fair to say that we're all concerned about women who work on the streets. Prostitution isn't their biggest problem, however. Most of them have addictions and/or live in dire poverty. Those are the problems that need to be solved; outlawing the purchase of sex isn't going to do anything about them.

 

I'm sure we're all concerned about trafficking that includes or involves sex work. No one should have to be a sex worker unless they want to, period.

 

We have laws against human trafficking, but they are not adequately enforced. We also have laws against sexual activity with people under 18 years of age. These, too, may not be adequately enforced. Why not? That's the question. We have these laws, but the people who should be protected by them are not necessarily receiving the protection they're entitled to. That's a big problem, and more laws won't change the attitudes of the police and judiciary system.

 

Finally, most studies say that at least 85% of sex workers in Canada work indoors, in private. We're in every city, in every neighbourhood, quiet, discrete and orderly. I'm in a very up-scale Vancouver neighbourhood. My rates are fairly high. Those two things, all by themselves, contribute enormously to my safety. If it does become illegal to pay for sex in Canada, I don't think my business will be affected: I'm so under the radar as it is, now. Most people have no idea that women my age work very successfully as paid companions.

 

Now, if we could just get our clients who are politicians, police officers, lawyers, judges and court staff on side.... LOL

[Guest T**E******s]

Decriminalizing should mean just that.

 

(Law) (tr) to remove (an action) from the legal category of criminal offence to decriminalize the possession of marijuana

decriminalization , decriminalisation.

 

It just couldn't be that simple though could it?

[Megan'sTouch 23875]

Criminalizing buying sex to fight human trafficking is like criminalizing sex so it's easier to arrest rapists.

[JustSomeDude 100]

This thread brings to mind a quote from Robert Heinlein that I hold dear.

 

"I am free, no matter what rules surround me. If I find them tolerable, I tolerate them; if I find them too obnoxious, I break them. I am free because I know that I alone am morally responsible for everything I do."

 

The government can pass a law making it illegal for me to buy sex but they can't legislate what I think, believe or do.

 

Live and let live, I say, but always be aware of how your actions will affect others. If only we could all live by such a simple code.

[Capital Hunter 18263]

Anybody cares (or dares) to elaborate what would happen to the prostitution laws in Canada now that a strong majority conservative government is elected?

[cflpoolboss 160]

When will they learn,the more illegal it is the more dangerous it becomes.

[ohohoh 92]

Well if they ever make it illegal to pay for friendly and consenting companionship, then I hope that when they arrest me that my companion has put a huge smile on my face ... one last hoorah!

[d*mm*y 887]

Well she seems to be very busy with the Health portfolio this time around so I think we can stop the witch hunt. I think last time she let the success of the child pornography legislation get to her head, and we all know how the uninitiated draw a correlation between prostitution and underage pornography and slave trading.

[Guest W***ledi*Time]

Well she seems to be very busy with the Health portfolio this time around so I think we can stop the witch hunt. I think last time she let the success of the child pornography legislation get to her head, and we all know how the uninitiated draw a correlation between prostitution and underage pornography and slave trading.

 

Dummpy, to whom are you referring? Leona Aglukkaq was reappointed minister of health. Joy Smith is not in cabinet - her website indicates that she continues to pursue the Human Trafficking file.

[d*mm*y 887]

Over the past 18 months she has chaired and or been a member of many health sub committees. It is my opinion and I could be wrong that she will get more involved in this direction as she starts to make some headway. Yes the human trafficking issue is important, but finding the right mix of legislation to combat it is not.

[Capital Hunter 18263]

Can you WIT or anyone please elaborate what would happen if and when the Supreme court of Canada rules in favor of sex workers?

 

1 - The Federal government would sit idle and do nothing about it and let municipalies decide or legalize it.

2 - Would go ahead and pass laws to legalize prostitution in Canada

3 - Would pass laws to pass tough anti-prostitution laws in Canada

4 - would push through parliament, the Nordic model in Canada

5 - Other

 

My gut feeling (and I hope I am wrong) is either 3 or 4!!!.

[Guest W***ledi*Time]

Can you WIT or anyone please elaborate what would happen ....

 

My opinion, often stated, is that the future of Prostitution Law in Canada is very much up in the air. My preferences are well known here, and I'm sure many folks are thoroughly sick of hearing them. So I try to confine myself to interjecting, every now and then, a reminder of a few basic facts into the many threads that attempt to predict the outcome of this long and complicated process. Speculation, as they say, is a mug's game.

 

First, it is by no means certain that the Supreme Court will ultimately uphold Himel, especially given the upcoming opportunity for the current Prime Minister to replace several retiring justices - possibly with new justices who are less activist and more deferential to parliament.

 

I believe that there is little stomach in Parliament to legislate prostitution laws of any sort, despite the findings of Parliamentary studies which have consistently shed light both on the need, and on the right direction. (It's no secret that I myself am partial to many, although not all, of the provisions of the New Zealand model as a legislative starting point).

 

In the event of a SCC ruling in favour of Himel, Parliament also has the power to invoke the "Notwithstanding Clause", which can be used to override the particular sections of the Charter which are at issue in Bedford v Canada. Whether stomach is there to use this clause is another matter.

 

The presence of a significant influx of urban Toronto MPs into the Conservative caucus following the May 2011 election may possibly be a further moderating influence in enabling the government to resist the siren call of the possibility of pursuing an ideologically-driven legislative agenda in this and other social policy areas.

 

If Himel's ruling is ultimately upheld, the real battle will begin in the arena of politics for the minds of both the public and the legislators (well, it's actually already taking place, both "on stage" and behind the scenes on a number of fronts). This political activism can use all of the help we can continue to give it.

 

No single future scenario is set in stone, and there are many paths that developments may yet take. As I've also stated on a number of threads - although my crystal ball is cloudy, I'm a cautious optimist.

[SamanthaEvans 166767]

WIT, your commentary is always so valuable. Thank you for stating your views, once again, and for helping us to think clearly about the issues.

 

There's a lot of misinformation about the so-called "Swedish model." It's a good idea to get the facts rather than rely on third or fourth-hand information. A good place to start is with Laura Agustin, an internationally acclaimed expert on human migration, labour, human trafficking and prostitution. She writes the blog, The Naked Anthropologist, which is about migration, trafficking and sex work. She is also the author of The Other Swedish Model, in which she takes issue with some of the common assumptions about the success of the Swedish model.

[Guest W***ledi*Time]

Mia Rabson reports for the Winnipeg Free Press, 3 July 2011:

 

http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/local/city-mp-has-new-sex-trade-bill-124935124.html

 

OTTAWA -- Last year she went after the traffickers.

 

Now, Winnipeg MP Joy Smith is taking on the buyers.

 

This September, the Conservative MP from Kildonan-St. Paul will introduce legislation to criminalize the act of buying sex.

 

"I want to target the demand," said Smith. "If you take the market away, these victims aren't in such jeopardy."

 

Smith has made human trafficking the central focus of her political career and last year had a private member's bill passed implementing mandatory minimum sentences for convictions of trafficking a minor.

 

The first anniversary of the bill just passed, and Smith said she's not done trying to wage war against one of the biggest criminal industries in the world.

 

The new bill will be modelled after the Nordic model of prostitution, which views women who sell sex as victims and those who buy sex as criminals and oppressors.

 

Sweden was the first to pass a law criminalizing the purchase of sex in 1998, but it has had mixed reviews and the impact on prostitution in Sweden is the subject of some debate. Being caught buying sex in Sweden will net you a fine of approximately 50 days' pay or up to a year in jail.

 

Criminalizing sex was one of the recommendations in the national strategy against human trafficking Smith wrote and released last year.

 

Currently the law in Canada targets those who sell sex, rather than those who buy it.

 

That, however, is potentially going to change depending on the outcome of a court case in Ontario where a judge struck down three anti-prostitution laws, including keeping a common bawdy house, communicating for the purposes of prostitution and living on the avails of prostitution. The decision has been put on hold pending a government appeal against the case.

 

Implementing a national strategy was one of the Conservatives' election promises, and

Smith said she has the backing of the PMO for her new bill.

 

Although private member's bills are often considered the lowest of priority and get less time for debate than bills introduced by cabinet, Smith has a lucky streak going when it comes to her initiatives.

 

In 2008, she drew the third spot in the lottery for private member's bills that helped get the mandatory minimum sentence bill through. The draw, usually done at the start of each Parliament, determines the order in which the hundreds of bills introduced by individual MPs get debated. A low number gives a bill much better odds of actually making it to a vote.

 

When the draw was done this spring, Smith and her caucus-mates were shocked when she pulled a four.

 

"Everyone is teasing me saying they're going to take me to Las Vegas," said Smith.

 

Her first human trafficking bill, C-268, could get its first use after two men were arrested and charged with trafficking offences in the Halton and Peele regions of southern Ontario. They both face multiple charges including trafficking of a minor, the offence created by C-268. If convicted, they would be sentenced to a minimum of five years in prison.

[SamanthaEvans 166767]

I'm all in favour of legislation if it's accompanied by sustained police and judicial focus on human trafficking and the sexual exploitation of children. We already have laws that address these issues, of course, but as far as I can see there's no significant, country-wide interest in enforcing them.

 

Defining every person who works in the sex trade as a victim, however, is insupportable. I am not a victim. No one twisted my arm, threatened or blackmailed me into this profession. I can retire anytime I choose to do so and the only ones likely to object may be some of my regular clients.

 

"I want to target the demand," said Smith. "If you take the market away, these victims aren't in such jeopardy."

This is so short-sighted as to be myopic, in my rarely humble opinion. Not only is it extremely naive to imagine that legislation can stop men from wanting sex, that men do want it is not the fundamental reason that sex trade workers--especially those who work outside, on the streets--have been targeted by the likes of Willy Picton.

 

But what in the world does this MP imagine will happen to sex workers if their clients are subject to prosecution for purchasing their services? She seems to think that if there are no customers, the women will simply find another way to support themselves that's somehow safer.

 

The thing is, the outside workers were at enormous risk before they entered the sex trade. Their basic problems have little to do with men wanting sex and being willing to pay for it, and a great deal to do with the fact that the great majority of these women are mentally ill and/or addicted to the drugs they can buy on the street.

 

As I've said before in these forums and in other places, if the government has any genuine interest in reducing or attempting to eliminate the street-based sex trade, they would crack down on the production and distribution of illegal drugs. That's not going to happen, though, when the drug trade forms an essential part of the economy of some major cities. For example, on one particular corner of Vancouver's Downtown East Side, the total street sales of heroin alone is more than $1 billion per year.

[Capital Hunter 18263]

This September, the Conservative MP from Kildonan-St. Paul will introduce legislation to criminalize the act of buying sex.

I'm all in favour of legislation if it's accompanied by sustained police and judicial focus on human trafficking and the sexual exploitation of children..

This is not limited to human trafficking only but includes buying sex in general that extends to all types of prostitutions even outcalls, is it not?. This is complete Swedish model..... This will virtually kill the industry and for those who remain in the trade (both SPs and hobbyists) very unsafe place to be for reasons I have explained before....

 

I told you so :icon_frown:

.

[Capital Hunter 18263]

Nothing will kill the industry. For a multitude of good reasons prostitution is called "the oldest profession." While a so-called "Swedish model" law may reduce street prostitution for a time, even in Sweden it has not eliminated it and, as here, there has been little police or judicial interest in independent escorts who work indoors.

 

I said it will virtually kill the industry not totally. There are always those who will break the law no matter how criminal the law or stiff the penalty will be, but I am not one of them and I am sure the overwhelming majority of SAFE hobbyists would stop too. Statistics in Sweden may not apply to Canada. This would be a new law if passed in Canada and nobody knows beforehand how hard the LE would crack down on independent escorts until after (God Forbid) it becomes the law of the land. On another note, I don"t wish to be one of those so called "ONLY" 757 men LOL!! (consdering the fact that Canada's population is 3 times Sweden this is equivalent to almost 2500 men in Canada). Were Those who convicted and paid (in Sweden) not publicized? (Swedish law says their names should become public). How many families were broken as a result. How many lost their jobs, homes, families and for what? consensual sex!!!.

 

I am not sure where you have your information that the Swedish model only targeted Street prostitutes. The law says buying sex is criminal and punishable up to a year in jail or 50 days of the salary (depending how kind or conservative the judge may be so depending on your luck) and that includes escorts too, even outcalls (to have a date in the privacy of my own home). Not sure how much worse penalties would be for repeat offenders!!. This is crazy. what are we going to become? A religious republic in middle east lol!!!!). Since when government of Canada looks into citizen's bedrooms!!!!???. Since when we put people in jail, disgrace them in public and make them lose their jobs for having consensual sex in an advanced country??

 

This does not make it safer for service providers either (the fact that it is not a crime for SPs and hence safer for them is a misconception in Sweden). When most safe hobbyists stop and mostly those not caring about commiting crime stay it would become unsafe for everyone, but especially for service providers. Likely a relatively safe board like cerb where SPs can advertise and meet most likely a safe hobbyist (or check him out with other SPs or in the SP private area) will be outlawed. Not to mention that those minority safe hobbyists who may stay could potentially subject themselves to extorsion (how do I dare to invite someone into my home when she can call the police and have me arrested if I don't pay up say ten thousand dollars instead of agreed $300 lol??). Also when they push thiings underground, it becomes very unsafe for both sides. This is a proven fact...

 

I will remain strongly against this model no matter what because is no good for either side. There are better and more civilized ways to combat human trafficking and pimping. Swedish model is NOT one of them. I think it is best to expose this model"s faults and shortcomings loud and clear and write to our MPs (if it ever goes to be voted on) rather than understating or underestimating its undesirable consequences. My views.

[Guest W***ledi*Time]

Yes , the Swedish Model is undesirable, and any moves toward introducing similar measures into Canada should be resisted vigourously.

 

As to what its impact would be on the over-all industry, that remains to be seen. We all operate differently. For instance, many clients (I for one) participate in in-calls now. Since those who do so are breaking the current Bawdy-House law, in-call clients are already (technically) subject to a $5000 fine plus 6 months in jail. So for in-call clients - heck, what's the real diff? There's the law ... and then there's the enforcement of the law, on a practical basis. And, as of now, we don't know the specific penalties that might be called for in Smith's proposed legislation, anyway.

 

From the current Criminal Code of Canada:

 

210.... (2) Every one who .... (b) is found, without lawful excuse, in a common bawdy-house ... is guilty of an offence punishable on

summary conviction

.

 

787. (1) Unless otherwise provided by law, everyone who is convicted of an offence punishable on

summary conviction

is liable to a fine of not more than five thousand dollars or to a term of imprisonment not exceeding six months or to both.

 

Regarding Smith's proposed bill: It's a Private Members' Bill - not a bill directly sponsored by the Government. The Nordic Model is not directly supported in Conservative Party Policy, as we saw by the resolution passed in their recent policy convention.

 

Smith is selling this as a measure against human trafficking. Now is the time, with a clearer agenda revealed, for us all to direct our efforts at educating our Members of Parliament, and the public in general, of the error in this logic, and the flaws of criminalization in all its forms.

 

This may be being floated by the Conservatives, through Smith as proxy, to see what the reaction is. Better to have the opportunity to fight against a private members' bill, than to fight against a bill drafted as a Government measure. Opposition, marshalled and expressed wisely, has a much greater chance of derailing a private members' bill. Only 14 Private Members' Bills containing Criminal Code amendments have been adopted by the Canadian Parliament since Confederation (although one of these was Smith's own Child Trafficking Law of last year - see http://www.joysmith.ca/news.asp?newsID=580).

 

A self-promotional statement to the local press by Smith (such as we have just read) is one thing; drafting the detailed provisions of the private members' bill is another; marshalling enough support to shepherd it through the various parliamentary stages to see whatever may be finally proposed become the law of the land is another. Whether such a measure would be consistent with the Constitution would also be an issue. How that law would be enforced by police is yet another.

 

The grounds for battle are gradually becoming clearer as we go along; the crucial moments of the battle itself, in all its stages, are still to be fought. But it's time for us all to get busy and continue to do our parts in spreading the voice of reason.

[Capital Hunter 18263]

Yes , the Swedish Model is undesirable, and any moves toward introducing similar measures into Canada should be resisted vigourously.

 

As to what its impact would be on the over-all industry, that remains to be seen. We all operate differently. For instance, many clients (I for one) participate in in-calls now. Since those who do so are breaking the current Bawdy-House law, in-call clients are already (technically) subject to a $5000 fine plus 6 months in jail. So for in-call clients - heck, what's the real diff? There's the law ... and then there's the enforcement of the law, on a practical basis. And, as of now, we don't know the specific penalties that might be called for in Smith's proposed legislation, anyway.

 

Regarding Smith's proposed bill: It's a Private Members' Bill - not a bill directly sponsored by the Government.

 

Hear hear on first paragraph.

 

No sure it is the same though as for your second paragraph WIT. True penalties still high for incall if one is caught (something I personaly never do even though it cost me a lot extra to be outcall only but it worth it), however, the difference is that, now the (wrong) SP don"t pick up the phone and call the LE while you are there or after you leave (because she would be charged too as it is illegal for her too), NOT so in the Swedish model lol. Hobbyists could be subjected to extorsion. Be careful not to make anyone mad lol (negative reviews, no shows, disputed donation, services) and take lots of cash with you in case she asked for a lot more than what is agreed, lol.

 

On you last paragraph, it is my understanding that this woman (Smith) has been successful in the past to pass two other private bills through the Parliament!!!. So what would be different this one?.

 

Smith is selling this as a measure against human trafficking. Now is the time, with a clearer agenda revealed, for us all to direct our efforts at educating our Members of Parliament, and the public in general, of the error in this logic, and the flaws of criminalization in all its forms..

 

HEAR HEAR. Bravo :-).