Sunny Days and C-36...???

[mrrnice2 157005]

We are now only six months into the Liberal majority government mandate and I am beginning to wonder.

 

P.M. Trudeau has indeed already met some of his election promises (which is great) and there are indications that other promises are working their way through the system. I am very nervous and scared that they will ratify the TPP and that will be yet another global screwing of Canadians in order to support big business and the multinationals.

 

On a level more pertinent to members here, I have yet to hear any indication that the Protection of Communities and Exploited Persons Act (Bill C-36) will be repealed, amended or even sent to the Supreme Court for interpretation of its legality. Perhaps this is in the works and understandably its probably not something that they want to publicly acknowledge, so I still have at least some minor hopes for action.

 

I have for my entire adult life communicated with my local Member of Parliament or the various Prime Ministers and I always received a reply, if even only a form letter, until the Harper government took office. Since then nothing. I even occasionally had a phone call about whatever I wrote about from my M.P.

 

Following the election I wrote under my own name to the Prime Minister Mr. Trudeau, the Justice Minister and Attorney General Jody Wilson-Raybould and to my local M.P. about the legislation based on Bill C-36. I received not even an acknowledgement so perhaps our present government is in reality little different from the past one.

 

To my knowledge which is based solely on following web sites of the organizations that speak for sex workers, there is no lobbying going on to keep the subject in the mind of government at a Canadian level. I follow as best as I can P.O.W.E.R, Maggies, Stella and P.I.V.O.T., all of whom made presentations at the hearings on Bill C-36.

 

My position prior to the legislation was that it will be responsible for the deaths of women. I still believe that to be true, primarily for street workers.

 

I cannot help but wonder if well established sex workers who do actually screen for their personal safety are not on their very individual level very happy with the legislation as it now exists. I certainly do not see SP's here being at all vocal about the legislation other than to use its existence as a way of telling clients who they can actually trust.

 

As for Mr. Trudeau and Jody Wilson-Raybould I shall be a bit more patient and see if their, "Sunny Days", indeed is real.

[drlove 37204]

If Trudeau and his cabinet played their cards right, they could come out looking like heroes, rectifying the wrongs of the Harper government. I feel the reason the whole C-36 debacle isn't garnering much attention is that it's somewhat of a hot potato.... no one really wants to handle it. The key is really how the entire issue is framed. If I was Trudeau, I wouldn't even mention prostitution per se:

 

First off, it's about respecting the Supreme Court and abiding by its ruling, both in the letter of the law and the spirit of the law. Also, it's about treating all working Canadians fairly and equitably. Work is work, whether it's sexwork or something else, and should be accorded the same rights and privileges across the board.

 

Second it's about protecting the vulnerable and marginalized workers. Safety is a basic right for all, and the laws governing sexwork in Canada should be written and applied to reflect this.

 

Third, it's about separation of Church and State. We live in a democracy, not a dictatorship. The notion that the ideals of a specific segment of society should be imposed on the whole through legislation is anathema to independent thought. It's about giving agency to men and women in deciding how or how not to use one's own body. Trudeau could even invoke the famous words of his father... "As my father once said, The state has no business in the bedrooms of the nation!" I could see it now... ah, if only...

 

Point being, the sooner government as a whole realizes that prostitution is a ubiquitous facet of our society, the better off we'll be. It's not going away, folks. Every so often I'll hear the Liberals give a sound byte on the topic, but nothing ever extends from there. This would be the perfect time to do it, as it's still early enough in their term that it will be forgotten about by the time the next election rolls around. As a side note, why is it that Ms. Bedford isn't continuing the court battle for us? After all, she's the one who started it...

[mrgreen760 37785]

"I feel the reason the whole C-36 debacle isn't garnering much attention is that it's somewhat of a hot potato.... no one really wants to handle it"

 

The backroom guys and gals will decide whether it's an issue that has traction with the electorate at large and if there's nothing to be gained they'll keep their head down.

 

Pot is a whole other issue and even though there's much more traction with the electorate I don't expect much concrete to happen until 12-18 months out from election. If they were serious it would be decriminalized now.

 

In the end it's politics sunny days or not.

 

Peace

MG

[Midnite-Energies 110563]

According to the Justice Minister, this is on their radar and will be looked at and I think that may begin soonish. She has mentioned on numerous occasions when asked that it will be addressed and those it impacts included in the conversation.

 

Up until this point, the Liberals had bigger fish to fry with only two examples being the assisted suicide bill that was on a time limit and the missing indigenous women. With the budget announcement last week, plans are in place for both so now would be a good time for a push on the Minster. This legislation may be exceedingly important to us but when you're a new government with a list of things to correct, it may not be a top priority on the priority list.

[Guest *Ste***cque**]

As an aside, my 80+ year old mother thinks prostitution laws should be relaxed to protect workers but is against marijuana laws being relaxed.

 

To your post, I'd be surprised, but impressed, if the government addressed this anytime soon.

[Grass_Hopper 18263]

I never understand the threads about the new laws. The words are so technicals that I gave up long ago.

 

All I know is what I do is legal, beneficial, and good for the economy.

 

All I ask for is a safe place to work out of.

[drlove 37204]

According to the Justice Minister, this is on their radar and will be looked at and I think that may begin soonish. She has mentioned on numerous occasions when asked that it will be addressed and those it impacts included in the conversation.

 

I hope you're right!

[loopie 15358]

Sadly, I think I misjudged the cultural consensus on this issue at time the law was passed. Maybe I was projecting my own feelings onto others. I thought Harper was doing something unpopular. I think I was just out of touch. I now believe that most Canadians are anti-sex trade. I think most people believe that the sex trade and feminism are incompatible. I think Trudeau will find greater popularity presenting himself as a feminist with his gender-balanced cabinet and his attacks on the wage gap and telling young girls to believe they can become world leaders than he ever will by re-legalizing the sex trade. I don't see any conflict as to why he can't do all those other obviously feministy things and still be pro-sex trade, but I think most people see it as mixed messages and he'll stick with the popular message. I hope I'm wrong.

[mrrnice2 157005]

Certainly no one knows what is in the minds of government as we see from the posts above but it appears as if we still are hoping for the best.

 

The, "Sunny Days," comment from Mr. Trudeau still causes me to hope that he will act on fairness, science, valid studies, and in the interest of as his father said, "A just society."

 

I'm not sure Loopie that Canadians were behind the passing of the legislation as much as they were apathetic as based on their lack of knowledge and their misconceptions. I know myself that six years ago I would have been one of the ignorant masses who could have cared less.

 

So crossing fingers and hoping for the best.

[drlove 37204]

I'd just like to reiterate part of my previous post... Why is it that Ms. Bedford seems to have given up the fight, so to speak? I remember seeing an interview on The National at a time when C-36 was being drafted. A female lawyer (her name escapes me) clearly stated that if C-36 passes, the issue will go right back to court. Sadly, that hasn't happened. Moreover,I was fully expecting the three individuals who brought forth the original challenge to in essence, pick up where they left off and continue. While their intentions were good, the status quo if left unchanged, has actually left us in a worse predicament than we were in previously. To leave things as they are basically defeats the purpose of what the court challenge was all about - to make sexwork safer for all of the beautiful, intelligent ladies who choose to partake in it.

[Phaedrus 209521]

My understanding (and I can't remember where I heard this) is that the plan was always to address C36 sometime in the middle of the government's lifespan. So they're probably doing some background work on it now, but I wouldn't expect anything to happen for a bit. Given that MMIW is a high-profile issue right now, they may try and tie it in with that.

 

Pot is a whole other issue and even though there's much more traction with the electorate I don't expect much concrete to happen until 12-18 months out from election. If they were serious it would be decriminalized now.

 

There was an announcement that they planned to get legislation through within a year. It was, appropriately, on 4/20. It wouldn't surprise me if they try and time it so it become legal on 4/20 next year :)

[Kathryn Bardot 99339]

I'd just like to reiterate part of my previous post... Why is it that Ms. Bedford seems to have given up the fight, so to speak?.

 

Well, for starters, the legal fees. It is not cheap to bring this all the way to the Supreme Court.

Secondly, the previous challenge was based on harms experienced by the plaintiffs. A new challenge would have to be based on harms, which IMO is going to take a client coming forward, since they bear the brunt of this law.

[Phaedrus 209521]

Well, for starters, the legal fees. It is not cheap to bring this all the way to the Supreme Court.

Secondly, the previous challenge was based on harms experienced by the plaintiffs. A new challenge would have to be based on harms, which IMO is going to take a client coming forward, since they bear the brunt of this law.

 

And third, it took well over a decade for the Bedford case to reach its conclusion. The hope is that things will change much faster than that if/when the government decides to do it.

[waterrat 1261]

The Minister of Justice received a mandate letter from the PM. In it there were a number of priorities. First on the list was assisted death legislation, second was missing and murdered indigenous women and girls. Fourth was to review the changes to our criminal justice system made by the pervious government.

 

Bill C-36 is likely to be addressed in the review of changes to the criminal justice system. A single bill is possible, it would address the minimum sentencing requirements (recently struck down) as well.

 

I expect that the inquiry into MMIWG will also make comments on C-36 and whether or not it places sex workers at greater risk than an alternative approach.

 

The new government is movie with deliberate speed (caution). If the response to physician assisted death is any indication, one can expect legislative proposals that satisfy nobody but don't really annoy the majority.

[bellafan 11341]

Given the relatively open, and relatively religion free, approach of the new government, there may be opportunities for people who know something about the sexual services world to contribute to finding better ways, and to help develop new legislation to help protect sexual services workers and their clients.

[Charlotte Edwards 8590]

 

I cannot help but wonder if well established sex workers who do actually screen for their personal safety are not on their very individual level very happy with the legislation as it now exists. I certainly do not see SP's here being at all vocal about the legislation other than to use its existence as a way of telling clients who they can actually trust.

 

 

 

I am dismayed you would insinuate this. Bill c36 makes it harder for us to conduct business safely. Please remember that most of the inquiries we get are from new guys who have never hobbied or rarely see providers. Some of them are so terrified of this stupid law that they think they're right to be anonymous with a fake number fake name and no reference waiving money at us trumps our desire for safety. I wish the bill would be repealed and abolished because the government should only be concerned with under age and sex trafficking. Grown adults should be able to make their own decisions when it comes to their sexual partners and paying for it directly is simply a different manner.

[Meaghan McLeod 179664]

I'd just like to reiterate part of my previous post... Why is it that Ms. Bedford seems to have given up the fight, so to speak?

 

She spent alot of money, and is actually really sick. She hasn't given up, but I for one wouldn't want to go through another long fight after what she went through.

 

There are some that were mad about the challenge, as before, most worked around the law - prostitution was legal - it was just how it was communicated and where it took place.

 

Now, we are placed in a legally compromising situation - we can advertise and sell our services, but our clients cannot purchase them. So, it puts us in a position of having to dance around words.

 

I do wish clients would stop trying to evade our screening. In the US, screening is mandatory. Their laws are even more intrusive for both parties - yet, everyone participates in proper screening. If you are truly worried, join a verification site, pony up the money to join, and get references from established providers.

[Ice4fun 78407]

In my opinion it is pretty unlikely that the current government will do anything with the existing law until it is either challenged in the courts or it legality is questioned by the courts as part of their administration of the law.

 

The reality is governments do thinks that will reflect well on their popularity and controversial issues like Prostitution are unlikely to help them. I agree that the majority of Canadians are probably not against legalizing prostitution but so what very few of them would see this as an important issue and certainly not an issue that drives political action.

 

So I don't expect much from the government but I hope they prove m wrong.

 

Just my opinion