C36 has passed in the House of Commons

[Kathryn Bardot 99339]

It's not law - yet. It needs to pass through the Senate and obtain Royal Assent.

 

Here's how MPs voted -- or more importantly, DIDN'T vote -- and how to get in touch with them: http://openparliament.ca/votes/41-2/249/

[piano8950 32577]

156 Cons gave their vote. It was just enough that if everyone else voted no, it still would've been passed. 155 is the number to beat.

[Kathryn Bardot 99339]

156 Cons gave their vote. It was just enough that if everyone else voted no, it still would've been passed. 155 is the number to beat.

 

I think it would have had more of an impact if the bill had passed with a narrower margin. Of those who didn't vote:

1 Independent

3 Liberals

14 NDPs, of which:

Alexandre Boulerice tweeted about "building safe workspaces for everybody" and then decided a public speaking engagement at a Toronto Steel Workers' Health and Safety conference was more important than voting on safe workspaces for sex workers.

Eve Peclet has been very vocal against C36, and "had a personal emergency".

Peggy Nash was speaking at a CUPE conference in Toronto. CUPE has publicly declared their support against C36.

 

 

Even a vote FOR C36 would have meant more. Not voting says to me that they just don't care. And I'm pretty mad about that.

[star99 4852]

any idea when it will become law?

[Kathryn Bardot 99339]

It has to pass through the Senate, where it will go through three readings and a vote. If the Senate votes for the bill, it will then be presented to the Governor General for Royal Assent; the GG may assent, reserve assent, or hold assent. If assent is given, then it becomes law.

 

http://library.queensu.ca/gov/bills_federal

 

[toklat77 4616]

Looks like it is only a matter of time then for this bill to become law and probably by Christmas. Then i guess sites like CERB will be no more.

[Kathryn Bardot 99339]

Not necessarily. Prostitution in the US is 100% illegal and yet review sites exist there.

[mrgreen760 37785]

Obviously no real surprise here as there was no way this wasn't going to happen once proposed. A game changer for sure and the next couple of months will be interesting as some players on both sides will simply disappear or "retire" and or bunker down until folks get the lay of the land.

 

Nothing stays the same. Ever

 

Peace

MG

[Warped88 5815]

...some players on both sides will simply disappear or "retire" and or bunker down until folks get the lay of the land....

 

Yep. That's the mindset I'm in. Not that I've been terribly active in the hobby the last 4-5 months, but I'll be stopping all activity related to the hobby until I (we) figure it all out. Over cautious, probably, but I'm not Fin' around with it.

[Luckyme 41401]

Not necessarily. Prostitution in the US is 100% illegal and yet review sites exist there.

 

Some sites similarly to cerb have already migrated to oversea where Canadian laws are out of reach - so I don't see sites like ours will disappear.

 

I wonder if this may be a good time for clients and ladies to exchange private email addresses - if privacy is not an issue of course.

[LeeRichards 177238]

I just wrote on my office calendar for January 1, 2015.

 

"Gov't says no fucking this year so I follow the law"

 

Then I wrote on my office calendar for January 2, 2015

 

"Fuck you .... You gov't commy bastards !!! I lied yesterday.... I am just always hungover from the New Years Eve Partay ! This is gonna be another Happy FUCKING New Year !! " ;)

[roamingguy 300292]

I think it would have had more of an impact if the bill had passed with a narrower margin. Of those who didn't vote:

1 Independent

3 Liberals

14 NDPs, of which:

Alexandre Boulerice tweeted about "building safe workspaces for everybody" and then decided a public speaking engagement at a Toronto Steel Workers' Health and Safety conference was more important than voting on safe workspaces for sex workers.

Eve Peclet has been very vocal against C36, and "had a personal emergency".

Peggy Nash was speaking at a CUPE conference in Toronto. CUPE has publicly declared their support against C36.

 

 

Even a vote FOR C36 would have meant more. Not voting says to me that they just don't care. And I'm pretty mad about that.

 

We hear how it is our civic duty to vote in elections. But if the average citizen has a civic duty to vote in elections, then isn't there a higher duty of those elected (and who got elected by average citizens carrying out their civic duty) to carry out both their civic and elected duty by voting on legislation drafted in The House Of Commons. If they are not willing to vote, and take a stand in Parliament they have no business asking citizens to vote them in as MP's.

Personally I think those that abstained in this vote just didn't want to upset their Party and also their constituents. The Party may have wanted a vote one way, their constituents another. To me, an abstaining vote is just an empty seat in Parliament, one better used by a politician who will take a stand, even if unpopular.

I angers me, they get a healthy income not to mention tax free allowances for being MP's, and they don't even do the job.

 

Looks like it is only a matter of time then for this bill to become law and probably by Christmas. Then i guess sites like CERB will be no more.

 

I personally don't think so. CERB may adapt. And no mention of sexual services in ladies' ads and websites. Escort sites exist (example The Er*tic Revi*w) in the United States. Also there are professional companions in the United States who have websites. BTW prostitution exists in the United States where for the most part it is illegal. Point to this, MacKay thinks C36 will eradicate prostitution. It has existed, and always will exist.

But escort recommendation and review board, jmho will still exist

 

A rambling

 

RG

[cinelli 22184]

Eve Peclet has been very vocal against C36, and "had a personal emergency".

Sceptical, but will give her the benefit of the doubt.

Peggy Nash was speaking at a CUPE conference in Toronto. CUPE has publicly declared their support against C36.

That is indeed ignorant, but typical of a politician to put campaigning ahead of everything else.

Even a vote FOR C36 would have meant more. Not voting says to me that they just don't care. And I'm pretty mad about that.

That was a good turnout for a vote. MPs spend time in their ridings and doing other government work that takes them away from Parliament.

It was a lot closer than I expected. It is a very contentious issue and I expected a lot more "Didn't Vote" from the non Tories.

We have to remember that there a lot of other things going on besides C36. Obviously everyone here thinks it is very important but I have never heard a single person at my workplace mention it, none of my non-pooning friends have ever mentioned it, and it has barely been mentioned in the media.

Disappointed that it passed even though it was inevitable.

[tfmonty 130]

Time will tell how this is going to go. Law enforcement may see this as a new toy to play with and set up stings etc. I think the secret will be to stay away from anything or anyone new. Tried and true with a history prior to the bill will be the way to go.

 

I am hoping it gets challenged it court and is thrown out since it is now on its way to becoming law.

[Ryan1967 1092]

I wonder if this may be a good time for clients and ladies to exchange private email addresses - if privacy is not an issue of course.

 

Email communication will not be any safer under the new law:

 

This enactment amends the Criminal Code to, among other things,

(a) create an offence that prohibits purchasing sexual services or communicating in any place for that purpose;

[tfmonty 130]

Email communication will not be any safer under the new law:

 

This enactment amends the Criminal Code to, among other things,

(a) create an offence that prohibits purchasing sexual services or communicating in any place for that purpose;

 

While you are correct in quoting the letter of the law, I truly hope they will not want to go to the effort of checking emails I sent or what emails an SP recieves. I could be wrong but really am hoping you are.

[roamingguy 300292]

Email communication will not be any safer under the new law:

 

This enactment amends the Criminal Code to, among other things,

(a) create an offence that prohibits purchasing sexual services or communicating in any place for that purpose;

 

Key is prohibiting purchasing sexual services or communicating in any place for that purpose

 

Don't discus money for sexual services. As the saying goes, money is for time and companionship. Keep sex and money out of the discussion.

 

RG

[Guest S****r]

I think the secret will be to stay away from anything or anyone new. Tried and true with a history prior to the bill will be the way to go.

 

I believe so, too.

[splaton008 1568]

I feel bad for new providers coming into the field after the bill becomes law. For a long time I will wait and see how things will pan out before seeing any new providers I don't know. In actual fact I will probably cut back on much of my hobbying. This bill has made it more questionable to even bother hobbying at all for many of us.

[Nicolette Vaughn 294340]

The key will be to call the provider directly. Back to services for time and companionship. Currently I do not use email. It's too anonymous and I will not be texting anymore either once this law goes into effect. I will put things in place such as a secondary phone number that is not advertised on the internet for regulars and will have another unpublished number to secure a first time booking with new clients. This way if I need to confirm their number, the number I have is in no way affiliated with escorting if it were to appear in phone records or someone decided to google it. I want to make this as discrete as possible for myself and my clients.

Posted via Mobile Device

[Luckyme 41401]

While you are correct in quoting the letter of the law, I truly hope they will not want to go to the effort of checking emails I sent or what emails an SP recieves. I could be wrong but really am hoping you are.

 

 

I do not see that LE will have the resources to check each and everyone of my emails exchanged between a lady and me. For safety measure, we can also keep out the discussions of sexual services as RG pointed out.

[roamingguy 300292]

I do not see that LE will have the resources to check each and everyone of my emails exchanged between a lady and me. For safety measure, we can also keep out the discussions of sexual services as RG pointed out.

 

Not to mention it's not as if LE can just arbitrarily pick someone's name out of a hat to check their email. It would require warrants which means the police have had to do some investigating already to have grounds to check your email. And that means you would have had to do something to draw the attention of LE to investigate

And searching emails is not going to be easy for LE when the SCC has already upheld internet users privacy

http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/internet-users-privacy-upheld-by-canada-s-top-court-1.2673823

My opinion, LE is going to focus on street prostitution not on seeing escorts/courtesans operating discretely

Just my opinion

 

RG

[Phaedrus 209521]

I think it would have had more of an impact if the bill had passed with a narrower margin. Of those who didn't vote:

1 Independent

3 Liberals

14 NDPs

 

They may have been paired, in which case it would have made no difference to the final margin.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pair_%28parliamentary_convention%29

 

Email communication will not be any safer under the new law:

 

This enactment amends the Criminal Code to, among other things,

(a) create an offence that prohibits purchasing sexual services or communicating in any place for that purpose;

 

The Internet has been previously found not to be a "place" under the old communications law (I forget the case, but it was pre-Bedford). I'm not sure if C36 explicitly mentions the Internet or not, but... absent anything else, it probably still isn't a place.

[Guest N***he**Ont**y]

It is like that old adage where the Politician passes you in the hall and says f@#*&!!! you and the citizen says no F@!!!&!!! YOU!@ the ballot box!

[cinelli 22184]

The Internet has been previously found not to be a "place" under the old communications law (I forget the case, but it was pre-Bedford). I'm not sure if C36 explicitly mentions the Internet or not, but... absent anything else, it probably still isn't a place.

 

I very strongly disagree.

 

ANY form of communicating for the purpose will now be an offence. It does not matter whether it is on the internet or face to face.

 

Your confusion stems from the old law. It used to be an offence to communicate in a "public place", and not an offence to communicate in a private place.

 

C36 makes it illegal to communicate by any means, in any place, for the purpose of purchasing sexual services.