Does Anyone Know Anything About This?

[drlove 37204]

Government holds In person consultation...

 

http://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/news-nouv/nr-cp/2014/doc_33053.html

[Meaghan McLeod 179664]

If everyone could complete the online survey, then the government will hear more then one view - lets get vocal people.

[Sweet Emily J 172062]

Government holds In person consultation...

 

http://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/news-nouv/nr-cp/2014/doc_33053.html

 

This is the first I've heard of this. There was nothing about it posted on the Justice Dept website until today.

 

I just did a little digging, looking for more info. I've heard that it was a closed door meeting, no Hansard, no minutes taken, no notes allowed. Some sex work activist/journalist/org Twitter accounts I follow said they've scoured their sex work contacts to find anyone who attended, or anyone who knows someone who attended, and have come up dry. Nikki Thomas tweeted that knows someone who attended, but is "not sure if they can speak about it". Seems there is a lot of mystery shrouding this "consultation".

 

The folks at http://www.afterbedford.com are seeking info about the meeting under the Access to Information Act Canada.

 

A few good sources of up to date info on Canadian sex work stuff are these Twitter accounts:

 

https://twitter.com/AfterBedford

https://twitter.com/SexSafetySecure

https://twitter.com/CanadianSexPro

[cinelli 22184]

Nikki Thomas tweeted that knows someone who attended, but is "not sure if they can speak about it". Seems there is a lot of mystery shrouding this "consultation"

 

It was supposed to be private so those providing their opinions could remain confidential.

 

It's hard enough to get customers to speak up. I sure as hell wouldn't go before a commitee if I thought people were going to be tweeting about me and what I said.

[canuckhooker 19203]

It was supposed to be private so those providing their opinions could remain confidential.

 

It's hard enough to get customers to speak up. I sure as hell wouldn't go before a commitee if I thought people were going to be tweeting about me and what I said.

 

I agree with you. It is not a conspiracy, but actually an attempt to get some reasoned well informed opinions free from the current societal stigma of being seen as a sex worker or a client.

[Sweet Emily J 172062]

Yeah, that makes sense. I'm definitely not a conspiracy theorist. We really don't know who was invited, or how the discussion played out. I think that sometimes for me, and others, it is just reflexive second nature to immediately be wary and cry foul, since we're often left out the important conversations. But who knows, considering the arguments on both sides, this consultation and possible subsequent others could very well work out in our favour.

 

I've actually been of the belief for a while now, that the govt is not likely to introduce new prostitution laws. This will just be another part of their big game of posturing. They'll keep talking about their big badass tough ideas, to appease the antis, but they have no interest in real legislation. They'll probably introduce tougher trafficking and exploitation laws with more jail time for offenders, and make a big scene of it. At the same time, they'll introduce some kind of big awesome way to make it look like they're helping victims, like more comprehensive programs for the most vulnerable sex workers to get help and find alternative work, with parts of their plan focussing on addiction, mental health & housing etc etc. Then they'll use the online & in-person consultations as just one way to justify not introducing prostitution-specific criminal law, by saying that Canadians have told them that they don't want more criminal laws (and they don't). Peter MacKay already said after the SCC ruling that there is "other laws in place to address the harms that flow from prostitution" (and there is), he's not stupid. They're just playing the game.

[fortunateone 156618]

They'll throw some more money at the anti trafficking league and congratulate themselves on solving the entire prostitution 'problem' or they will do another senate hearing study, like the one they already did in 2005.

 

Maybe that meeting is similar. I can't remember where I read a list of people one government (possibly a municipal one) was going to 'listen' to, but I do remember reading something about high school students were going to be involved. No sex worker group listed, but high school students were.

 

I wish i remembered if I am remembering that correctly tho or where lol

[otherlife 100]

As long as there is mutal consent of persons 18 or older and some type of wording that protects both service provider and client, i do not belive it should be a criminal code offense, say tim hortons does not want such contracts taking place in thier store, if not already law, could we inlcude no soliciting(such as salespersons to include sexual solciation) , that way if tim hortons puts up a sign no soliciting it is understood that it includes sexual solicitation.

[Sweet Emily J 172062]

Via: http://rabble.ca/blogs/bloggers/views-expressed/2014/03/ah-shouldnt-canadas-new-sex-work-legislation-include-workers-#.UzsmQuXJTdk.twitter

 

Re: The in-person govtconsultation with stakeholder representatives

 

According to the Department of Justice website, an in-person consultation with "a number of stakeholder representatives" was held on March 3 "to seek their views and input" on the future of sex work legislation in Canada. There is no mention of who these individuals or groups were. What is apparent is that the perspectives of several major stakeholders were completely overlooked.

 

Maggie's, WISH and PEERS are three of the largest sex worker support organizations in Canada, and none of them have been contacted by the government for their input. The people who staff these organizations have many years of experience providing support to those who work in the sex trade, and no doubt have a great deal of insight to offer on the problems that exist in the industry.

 

Kate Gibson, the Executive Director of WISH, reports that "No one from the government has contacted WISH to receive feedback directly from sex workers. One might hope that this would happen given that they are the ones who are the authorities in their lives and who are the most qualified to respond."

 

Madame Sage, a representative from Maggie's in Toronto, shared a similar revelation, lamenting that "As far as I know the government has not attempted to consult with any sex workers or sex worker organizations regarding the laws." The government hasn't reached out to PEERS in Victoria either. It is unclear who they are consulting with, and why they are not reaching out to people who have some of the most relevant experience of anyone in the country.

 

Read more...

[fortunateone 156618]

I think i am going to vote for Emily J in the next election!

 

:)

[Ice4fun 78407]

Via: http://rabble.ca/blogs/bloggers/views-expressed/2014/03/ah-shouldnt-canadas-new-sex-work-legislation-include-workers-#.UzsmQuXJTdk.twitter

 

Re: The in-person govtconsultation with stakeholder representatives

 

I fully understand the need for the confidentiality of Sex workers and clients to be protected in any "In Person" consultations that might be undertaken what I fail to understand is why no sex rights workers or so few if any sex workers or clients were aware of the consultation process. Due process and fairness would suggest that the Government should have put in place a process that would gave made the industry aware of the consultation and sought expressions of interest from parties interested in appearing.

 

If you secretly hold a meeting that you either don't invite people to or you hand pick the representatives don't go expecting a great airing of the issues in the industry.

 

Just my opinion

[TheRiddlerMan 872]

I fully understand the need for the confidentiality of Sex workers and clients to be protected in any "In Person" consultations that might be undertaken what I fail to understand is why no sex rights workers or so few if any sex workers or clients were aware of the consultation process. Due process and fairness would suggest that the Government should have put in place a process that would gave made the industry aware of the consultation and sought expressions of interest from parties interested in appearing.

 

If you secretly hold a meeting that you either don't invite people to or you hand pick the representatives don't go expecting a great airing of the issues in the industry.

 

Just my opinion

 

Of course they weren't consulted. This is a government in the process of effectively disenfranchising the most vulnerable groups in society who oddly enough also happen to never vote Conservative. Do you really think they would engage in real discussion over this issue? The consultations are a smokescreen, one they can use to pick a few responses which coincide with what they're going to do anyway.

 

I'm amazed that some people actually believe they would care what either providers or their clients think they should do. They're the last people on Earth the Conservatives would value for input.

[Guest S****r]

At last week's conference, Sex Work After Bedford: Legal Reform in Canada held at the University of Ottawa, Valerie Scott stated in her session that Sex Professionals of Canada (SPOC) and 14 other groups were invited to a consultation with Peter Mackay on March 3.

Each group was given 5 minutes to speak.

Nine of the 15 groups were anti sex-worker organizations.

Six of the 15 groups were pro sex-worker organizations

Of the 9 anti groups, 8 of them advocated for the Nordic model.

[jafo105 39057]

Nice to see that it was an even split between the Sex Worker Advocates (6) and the Abolitionists (9). {Sarcasm}

 

I wonder who sent out the invitations? (They clearly need a refresher in math) A 7 vs 8 would have been more appropriate. It might not sound like much. But really it is - 3 voices vs 1 voice makes a big difference. IMHO.

 

Well, it does not surprise me. The Harper government is after all pushing for a Nordic or Nordic like system. They want to make sure no one changes their mind -- especially the people most involved and affected by any new legislation. The sex workers themselves.

 

We have the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (1982). It has been in effect for 32 years. After all this time we still have individual exclusions, community exclusions, professional exclusions, and social exclusion. These are the very people it was intended to protect. That does not seem like much progress. IMHO.

[Ice4fun 78407]

This whole process is even more galling when you consider that every poll of Canadians that I have seen has the Canadian public supporting legalization.... so to change the narrative you spin the minority position while making it look like it is an open consultation process... this is typical Stephen Harper stuff....

 

Just my opinion