Shelly Glover, police officer “on leave and planning to return to it once she’s out of politics,” is currently peddling in hysterics and trading upon her time as a police officer that worked undercover on the prostitution beat. Glover says that the laws that were struck down will make it more difficult for police to help exploited women and children – err, except that the laws against human trafficking and child exploitation remain in effect. The laws that were struck down were the ones that made women in those situations be afraid to go to the police for fear of self-incrimination, which seems like a bigger deal than police using those laws to arrest those same women, criminalise them, and hope that it might instead put them in touch with social services agencies while they were locked up. And then there’s her caucus colleague, Joy Smith, who a) doesn’t actually read the literature on the Nordic Model of prostitution laws except for the ones that are devoid of fact and tell her what she wants to hear, and b) conflates all sex work with human trafficking, and all human trafficking with sexual exploitation, which anyone with an inkling of how things work can tell you is a gross overreach. I’m glad that Smith thinks that it’s easy enough to criminalise the buyers of sex to curb demand – because that totally worked with things like alcohol during the prohibition era or illicit drugs today, right, and criminalising those very same drug users is totally saving lives in places like Vancouver’s Lower East Side, right? Oh, wait… Terri Jean Bedford, one of the plaintiffs in the case, says that any new laws need to take consenting adults into account, which may be difficult when faced with an ideology that the exchange of sex for money is inherently bad (while ignoring the other transactions for sex that occur as part of everyday dating and marriage). CBC looks at five questions arising from the Supreme Court decision.
Author Archives: Dale
Roundup: In the wake of the Bedford decision
In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court has struck down the laws around prostitution that related to keeping a bawdy house, living off the avails, and communication for the purposes of prostitution (ruling here). They have given Parliament a year to come up with a new legislative regime before the laws are struck down entirely. Justice Minister Peter MacKay said that he’s disappointed by the finding that the existing laws were unconstitutional, while other Conservatives like Shelly Glover continue to say that these women are now without the “protection” that those laws offered – though the whole point of the ruling was that the laws were not protecting them, but were rather putting them in harm’s way. Part of the debate now moves to the question of how this will affect First Nations women in the sex trade in particular, but it would seem that harm reduction is a good step, particularly if the criminalization made them afraid to go to the police. Emmett Macfarlane writes about the significance of the finding and the way in which the Justices framed their concerns. David Akin looks at how the ruling will affect the various factions of the Conservative base, though it is likely to be more wailing and gnashing of teeth around supposed “judicial activism.” Brenda Cossman worries that the discussion will move toward how to criminalise prostitution rather than how to best regulate a decriminalised environment. Carissima Mathen points out that this court decision is in part because Parliament was negligent over the past three decades when they left these laws in place when they knew that a more comprehensive framework was needed. Andrew Coyne writes about just how very reasonable the decisions is, and how regulation and licensing may be the best choice going forward.
Roundup: Northern Gateway not quite good to go
The National Energy Board has given a conditional approval to the Northern Gateway Pipeline application – and by conditional, they attached 209 conditions to it. There will be additional hurdles with First Nations, as well as the BC government’s own five conditions. In response to the decision, Joe Oliver seems to have toned down his rhetoric around the pipeline proposal, while Harper praises the “rigorous” work of the NEB in this effort. CBC gives you six things to know about the decision. Energy economist Andrew Leach points out that the review is far from a real green light and that it’s not clear that all 209 conditions will be met. Michael Den Tandt counts the many ways in which the pipeline is likely doomed in spite of the NEB decision.
Roundup: Mourani renounces separatism
Pauline Marois has managed to do something particularly spectacular – she turned Maria Mourani from a dyed-in-the-wool separatist who ran for the leadership of the Bloc Québécois, into an avowed federalist. Indeed, Mourani announced yesterday that she is renouncing separatism and embracing Canada, because the Charter of Rights and Freedoms is the best way to protect minorities and Quebeckers as a whole, as opposed to the proposed Charter of Quebec Values. There remains no word if Mourani will seek to join another party – Thomas Mulcair said that she’d need to run as an NDP candidate before she could sit in their caucus – but it is a pretty big blow for the separatist movement.
Roundup: Strongly-worded letters toward progress
AFN National Chief Shawn Atleo is optimistic and sees progress after sending a strongly worded letter to Aboriginal Affairs minister Bernard Valcourt over the proposed First Nations Education Act, and Valcourt has been willing to consult further in order to get the bill right. (Strongly-worded letters – so very Canadian). Atleo nevertheless wants education funding boosted in the next budget, before the bill passes, which has been one of the sticking points of their negotiations.
Roundup: No CPP deal (for now)
The provincial and territorial finance minsters met with Jim Flaherty at Meech Lake yesterday, only for Flaherty to turn down the proposal that they were had a fair degree of consensus on. Flaherty insisted that that the global economy was still too fragile to implement this plan (though he did sound like maybe one day in the future he’d be more amenable), which left Ontario talking about going it alone. Ontario was also upset that in the transfer payment listings released that they were the one province destined to take a hit, which seems unprecedented as usually provinces are protected. Oh, but don’t worry, Flaherty says – their economy is growing. Um, okay. Manitoba also says that they may be out some $500 million because the last census took lace during major floods and up to 18,000 residents may have been missed, though StatsCan says that they double-checked their numbers. Going into the discussions were three different models on CPP expansion that were being discussed in the media, for the record.
Roundup: Moore denies poverty comments
There was some amount of Twitter outrage yesterday after James Moore was asked about child poverty in a radio scrum, and he responded that he didn’t want to usurp the jurisdiction of the provinces, that Canada was at its wealthiest, and that as the government, it wasn’t his job “to feed his neighbour’s child.” And he’s more or less right about the aspect of jurisdiction, for better or worse, though one could argue about transfer payments and so on. But when Moore stated it was all taken out of context and the headline was wrong, the reporter posted the raw audio and what do you know, it’s all in there. Oops?
As the finance ministers get set to meet about the pension issue later today, Jim Flaherty sounds like he may be bringing his own proposal to the table, which is all about being “more targeted” and not “a bazooka.”
Roundup: And Hyer makes two
As was widely guessed, NDP-turned-Independent MP Bruce Hyer joined the Green Party – not that this was any big surprise. I look a look at how the NDP botched their outraged reaction here. Interestingly, Hyer went on TV later in the day and let it be known that Thomas Mulcair is one of the reasons that he would never return to the NDP, and that the culture of whipping and control is getting worse under Mulcair than it would have been with almost any other leadership candidate. (Hyer backed Nathan Cullen, for the record). Mulcair went on to imply that Hyer didn’t have any values, which just makes the whole bitter act look all the more petty.
Charlie Angus’ wrongheaded understanding of our democracy
It was no surprise that NDP-turned-Independent MP Bruce Hyer joined the Green Party, if you’d paid the least amount of attention to the House of Commons over the past year or so. Hyer did flirt with the Liberals to a small extent, expressing support to Joyce Murray’s leadership campaign because of her stance on things like proportional representation, but really, Hyer and Elizabeth May have become quite the pair in the far corner of the Commons.
What was also not a real surprise was the outrage that the NDP would show over the move, and what should not have been a surprise was the stunning degree of civic ignorance demonstrated by Charlie Angus in his press release denouncing Hyer’s move.
Roundup: A coming loss to the Senate
It won’t happen for six months, but the news came out yesterday that Conservative Senator Hugh Segal will be retiring from the Upper Chamber before his term is complete, in June. Segal, one of the remaining Red Tories and a bit of a rebel who has pushed back against some of the government’s more egregious bills and actions, will be taking on the new position of Master of Massey College. Given that he has been one of the voices of sanity in the Conservative caucus, it will be a definite blow to the Senate’s membership and to the quality of debate. It will also mean the loss of expertise in foreign affairs, as Segal has also been our representative to the Commonwealth, and served on the Eminent Persons panel that saw the creation of the Commonwealth Charter.