I will follow my brief because I am not very comfortable.
Today Concertation des luttes contre l'exploitation sexuelle wishes to reiterate its support for Bill , which was introduced by Maria Mourani, the member for Ahuntsic.
We believe that, by targeting procurers and the profits of an exploitation-based industry, this bill will guarantee better protection for women engaged in prostitution and the victims of trafficking for sexual purposes.
Ms. Mourani's bill promotes a better understanding of the essential connection between prostitution and trafficking, both of which are based to a large degree on inequality and, to paraphrase Gloria Steinem, are created by the same customers who seek unequal sexual relations. Bill emphasizes that connection by including a subsection on sexual exploitation in section 279.04 of the Criminal Code, which concerns trafficking, and by attacking procuring, a definite step toward achieving equality between men and women in Canada.
In Canada, where most human trafficking is carried on domestically, there is demand for sexual services in all communities, in all provinces, but most of the time it requires that hundreds, even thousands of young girls be transported around the country to remove them from their families, friends and social networks and to erase all trace of them.
We also see that massive numbers of women are occasionally transported to specific regions of Canada to meet increased customer demand at sports and other events.
The clarification made before paragraph (a) of subsection 279.01(1) of the Criminal Code is important in having domestic trafficking recognized as an organized system similar in all respects to international trafficking and as something that must be punished as such.
The inclusion of the presumption of exploitation of a person following subsection (2) of that same section is also a clear measure in favour of the protection of women, who are the main victims of trafficking in Canada. The reverse burden of proof removes an enormous weight from their shoulders, as they are often afraid of reprisals if they testify and prefer to remain silent to having to relive their ordeal by testifying.
In addition, since 80% to 90% of women victims of trafficking are being used to supply the sex industry, we think they should be treated the same way as the victims of procurers, who are already subject to the reverse onus of proof, as provided by subsection 212(3) of the Criminal Code.
Lastly, by providing for exemplary and consecutive sentences and the forfeiture of the proceeds of procurers and traffickers, Bill clearly indicates that the commoditization of women, who are imported and exported, sold and resold for the benefit of men through trafficking, is a serious crime that deserves a clear sentence.
In conclusion, since the sex industry responds solely to profit and customer demand, it is imperative that we attack the sources of this market. That is why we at Concertation des luttes contre l'exploitation sexuelle believe that focusing on procuring and the forfeiture of proceeds generated by human trafficking, as Ms. Mourani's bill does, is the first appropriate, urgently needed step in addressing the problem of human trafficking for sexual exploitation purposes in Canada.
We also believe that, to affirm our solidarity with women who too often have no choice and to guarantee real protection for prostitutes, prostitution should be decriminalized. We hope that the Bloc Québécois and the other political parties will soon take action to that end and tackle the sex industry and the customers who support it head on.
In the meantime, we hail Ms. Mourani's initiative and hope that her bill is passed by all members of Parliament. This is a step in the right direction, one that gives us hope that one day we will move beyond the concept of individual choice and collectively assert the right of women, of all women, not to be prostitutes.
Thank you.
Walk With Me Canada was established by a survivor of human trafficking. Walk With Me was created with a commitment to ensuring that survivors have first response care and, secondly, with recognition that survivors should have a voice in developing a coordinated community response that can meet immediate crises and longer needs of trafficked victims.
Since its inception in 2009, Walk With Me has been working closely with various police services and has been able to provide unique services and support to many victims of human trafficking in Ontario and across this country.
Walk With Me Canada Victim Services' vision statement is transforming the lives of the victims of human trafficking while eradicating slavery in this country. The mission statement of Walk With Me Canada Victim Services is a survivor-led organization dedicated to raising awareness and providing education on issues of slavery, delivering and coordinating services, supporting victims to become survivors, and advocating action for change in our laws in this country.
In the last three years, Walk With Me has assisted over 200 men and women who have been rescued or left their position where they were trafficked for labour or, most often, for sex. Those we have helped thus far are both men and women, and their ages range from 14 to 45.
Several of these circumstances include multiple people being trafficked by the same person, which we think is very important in this bill. Often the word “stable” is used, and I apologize, but that's the word we often hear on the street. Some of the people, particularly in the sex industry, have a stable of young women, which makes the consecutive sentencing quite important to our organization.
Walk With Me operates a safe house and also provides first response assistance for trafficked persons. We are attempting to start and create second-stage housing for longer rehabilitation and reintegration into society for the people we help.
The bill itself, Bill —the three amendments—is supported by Walk With Me Canada, with some modifications in the language, hopefully. It purports to make three amendments to the Criminal Code of Canada. They are to provide consecutive sentences for offences related to procuring and trafficking in persons; to create a presumption regarding the exploitation of one person by another and add circumstances that are deemed to constitute exploitation; and finally, the amendment is to add the offences of procuring and trafficking of persons to the list of offences where forfeiture of proceeds of crime would apply.
Walk With Me Canada supports all three amendments. Our support is subject to a review of the legislation for wording and overlap with some of the previous amendments made in Bill .
On consecutive sentences for offences related to procuring and trafficking in persons, Walk With Me Canada's somewhat recent arrival on the scene does not allow us to have any scientific data for the committee with respect to concurrent sentences as opposed to consecutive sentences. A review of sentences with respect to trafficking in drugs and trafficking in persons shows that harsher sentences are handed out by our courts for drug trafficking than for trafficking in persons, either for sex or for labour. Not to make light of drug trafficking, but certainly the sentences are more harsh than they are for trafficking in persons.
Furthermore, Walk With Me Canada was involved in the largest human trafficking case in Canada, known as the Roma Hungarian labour trafficking case in Hamilton, where concurrent sentences were given to most of the offenders. The kingpin, Ferenc Domotor, was handed a significant sentence, but one that was concurrent.
At a post-sentencing gathering, where several of the victims attended after the sentence was handed down, we were able to discuss the court proceedings with the labour traffic victims. One of the young Hungarian men indicated he was not sure that the hell he had gone through was worth the trauma and post-traumatic stress he suffered, given the fact that the sentence was to be one sentence no matter how many victims were involved. Although he did not understand, in my view, concurrent versus consecutive, his assessment of the court proceedings and the sentence handed down by the court was that the amount served by Mr. Domotor would not have changed whether there was one victim or ten victims.
When this is coupled with the fact that multiple victims mean larger profits for the trafficker, consecutive sentences are a necessity for this heinous crime. Presently, a relatively low risk of having a more significant sentence for having two, three, or more victims of sex slavery or labour slavery is worth the financial gain. In other words, when you are able to garner upwards of $200,000 to $300,000 per trafficked victim in one year, and the only real risk in sentencing is a concurrent sentence for each additional victim, the trafficker is almost compelled to expand his business empire with little risk of significant ramifications to him in the criminal justice system here in Canada.
For those reasons, Walk With Me Canada supports this amendment.
Walk With Me Canada supports the amendment with respect to the “presumption regarding the exploitation of one person by another and adds circumstances that are deemed to constitute exploitation.”
Although the wording at first blush appears to provide some risk that innocent bystanders may be captured, the presumption is a necessary one for victims who are scared for their life. Some of the classic traits of trafficking in persons include threats to people's family, their own lives, and the lives of their friends. A lot of the time, the person has been transplanted from their roots to a foreign city, or even another country. As a result, being asked to testify is one of the scariest propositions of being rescued from trafficking.
In our experience, a lot of the women need to be removed from the city, or the province, for their own safety. The severe post-traumatic stress, anxiety, and depression that come with being victimized by their traffickers make testifying a deterrent, and it makes one reluctant to come forward. A reversal of the burden of proof, once a prima facie case has been put forward by the crown, is a welcome addition to the Criminal Code. Having the victim not testify, or not feel that her testimony is the only reason a police force will have to lay charges, will assist in the recovery process of victims.
Often, waiting for the Criminal Court proceedings to take place brings the recovery to a standstill, as they are singularly focused on their day in court, where they will have to face their trafficker again, and have the burden on their shoulders that the case will only be successful if they come and testify and put their life at risk.
For those reasons, Walk With Me Canada supports this amendment.
The amendment “adds the offences of procuring and trafficking in persons to the list of offences to which the forfeiture of proceeds of crime apply.” There are many statistics with respect to the profits made by human traffickers. Some of these statistics include trafficking one young woman for a profit of $280,000 to the trafficker in one year. Other statistics show that a sex-trafficked woman between the ages of 12 and 25 years can generate illicit tax-free income for the trafficker in the range of $300 to $1,500 per day. A government table, which was attached to our submission, shows that the average daily profit for one trafficked woman is in the range of $900, and an annual profit in the range of $280,000. A trafficker with 10 young women in his stable could have an annual profit in excess of $3 million. Backpage.com, an example of which we attached, is a unique way to find women in this country. Our example shows that five women were advertised from 11 a.m. to 4 a.m. in one hotel room. Also, if you look at it, the ranges were from $60 to $80 per half hour and $120 to $180 per hour. I looked at the attachment, and in fact the young lady in that attachment is actually being advertised at $200 per hour. You can appreciate the amount of profit you can make if you have four or five people doing that for you on any given day. It should be recognized that this is illicit income, and it's not subject to taxation. This is clear profit.
We're also aware, from our victims, that initially they see some proceeds of their being trafficked, and they are given nice things. Very quickly, once they are brainwashed by the trafficker, they receive less and less of the profit or material items, and the money goes into the coffers of the trafficker.
Anecdotally, we're aware that in the labour trafficking in Hamilton, one of the people who pleaded guilty owned a house in Ancaster, Ontario, that was listed at $750,000. This amendment would've allowed the crown attorney to have that family forfeit the home as proceeds of crime. RCMP surveillance and the evidence given at the trial, which I attended, show that many of the traffickers also had several bank accounts with significant funds in them, including welfare funds. They also could have been forfeited if this amendment had been made previously. As a result, the labour trafficker received a concurrent jail sentence, and in all likelihood a deportation, but he was able to keep all of his assets, including his bank account and his house.
The profit made by organized crime, street gangs, and entrepreneurial men who prey on young women and men in this country, as well as immigrant people who come to this country, needs to be stopped. Along with consecutive sentences, the risk of forfeiting all of the profits and their assets will be a deterrent to this heinous crime.
For the foregoing reasons, Walk With Me supports the three amendments. We hope they will assist in securing convictions that make the punishment proportional to the severity of the crime and that cause the traffickers to be deprived of the profits from their illicit activities.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Welcome, Mr. Hooper and Ms. Legault-Roy. Thank you for coming today.
Mr. Hooper, you and I know each other very well. Timea Nagy is an amazing victim who has risen above and is now helping police officers and is doing a lot of very good work. Mr. Hooper, as a lawyer for her organization, I have to thank you for all your volunteerism and for the work you have done as well.
Taking a look at this issue, you have described very well what we're looking at. It can be the girl next door. It can be people from abroad. I remember when Timea Nagy first came into Canada. She was trafficked from Hungary, as you know, and she was in a much different place from where she is right now, as one of the leaders in Canada, in my opinion, for helping victims of human trafficking.
In regard to the case you referred to in terms of the forced labour, I know between Timea, Toni Skarica, and a few of us, we did a lot of work on that one.
Looking at this whole bill from Maria Mourani, as you know, Bill and Bill did certain things to help with this issue of human trafficking. I would like you to talk a little bit more about how Bill will help the victims of human trafficking, because that is the issue here, where the victims go to court and they won't talk. I know for the men in the forced labour case it was a horrendous experience, and they actually had organized crime from Hungary after them as well, trying to come into Canada. In Bill C-310 we authorized the assumption of extraterritorial jurisdiction so that Canadian prosecution could happen if Canadian citizens or permanent residents who commit human trafficking went abroad. Then we had an interpretive provision, which expanded the definition of human trafficking to enable the courts to bring justice to these perpetrators. Bill C-452 will help the victims as well.
Mr. Hooper, I would like you to expand on your explanation of how this bill would apply to help these victims. Could you do that for us?
:
I appreciate that. Thank you for providing testimony here. It's great to be sitting in as a guest committee member.
I want to congratulate the member from St. Paul for the work that you've done over the years.
Ms. Legault-Roy, you mentioned sporting events. I actually tabled a motion a year before the Vancouver 2010 Winter Olympics that I was hoping to have unanimous consent for, to have an action plan to counter human trafficking, consistent with our obligations under the Palermo Protocol. We had the member from St. Paul's support that; unfortunately, I didn't get unanimous consent.
But it's great to see forward movement on this issue. I understand the Liberal Party is very supportive of Madame Mourani's bill—extending the jurisdiction to crimes outside of Canada; there are a number of different factors in it.
We have some concerns about two aspects in particular. One of them is the issue of consecutive sentence as opposed to concurrent sentence. My understanding is that the judges already have the power to impose a consecutive sentence. To take away flexibility from judges, to use their judgment, is always something to be done with a great deal of care. I'd like you to respond as to why you feel it's important, given that there's already the opportunity for judges to do consecutive sentencing.
Secondly, we have some concerns about the presumption of guilt and the potential situations where minors might be implicated and may not have the capacity or the resources, or even the situation, the support, in their lives to be able to defend themselves in a presumption of guilt situation.
I'd like to hear both of your comments on those two issues.
Thank you.
:
Thank you, Mr. Chair, and I thank the witnesses for being here today.
It's funny that I was following my line of questioning here, and then you got on to the point about “concurrent” and “consecutive”. Being a retired member of the RCMP, I have seen many times in the court system cases in which, in my opinion, the concurrent/consecutive opportunity that's available to the judge will always lead to “concurrent” rather than to “consecutive”, because the fact of the matter is that they don't want to be too harsh. When you start relying on that concurrent option, you will always rely on it. Nine times out of ten, I've seen that happen. So I'm glad to see this coming forward.
Ms. Murray asked for an example of deterrence of an offence. I'll give you one from British Columbia, although it's minor, and then I'll get to my question, if I may, Mr. Chair.
British Columbia brought in a deterrent for impaired driving whereby they took determination away from the judges and put it into a provincial ticket, under which you lost your licence automatically for 90 days, you lost your vehicle automatically for 30 days, and the cost of the fines was upwards of $5,000.
People went through the roof; they were mad. But was it effective? You're darn right it was effective. People stopped drinking and driving; they questioned whether they should have even one glass of wine, let alone more, at any bar. The liquor industry was starting to get upset because people weren't buying liquor the way they used to. It worked.
So there's an example wherein, if you make it tough enough, they will be deterred.
Here is my question to you. Our Conservative government has, since 2012, created a national action plan that has directed $25 million over four years to implement certain programs that would assist in this. Through the victims fund, we created, under Public Safety, Canada's contribution program to combat child exploitation and human trafficking. Could you talk to us about those initiatives?
Furthermore, I'm curious as to whether there are other initiatives that you believe the federal government could undertake, from the perspective of programs that would assist the victims of crime.
One that I can think of off the top of my head is that victims, and not just under your circumstances but certainly under most sex-related crimes, are scared blankless to give testimony, because they have to face the accused. I'm wondering whether there is some way of creating programs that would coach victims with their testimony so that they feel more comfortable.
Secondly, I wonder whether there is an opportunity—if not for the federal government, then in some form for the court system—in the case of a sex-related offence in which there is violence or a perception of violence that was going to be undertaken, for the victim to be mandatorily allowed by the judge to give evidence through a video link.
:
I'll try to do so as well.
Those are always interesting avenues, I think, if I can add a comment, because....
[Translation]
It is important for the accused to be able to confront the person who accuses them, but this must be made a little easier in certain types of cases. I have had enough of people not testifying because they are terrorized.
I initially had a few questions about the bill. My questions were similar to what Ms. Murray was saying earlier about the presumption. You answered the questions about the presumption at the hearings on Monday and in your two appearances.
I do not think the argument is valid. Surely this involves a reverse burden of proof, but, in the circumstances, and since this is already provided for in the code, it is not as though we were inventing something. So I am comfortable on this point.
As for the issue of consecutive sentences, I do not know whether you read the evidence of the police officers who appeared before us on Monday. Mr. Mai said this earlier, and that is one of the things that Detective Sergeant Monchamp said.
I am a practical woman. I very much like legislation. As a lawyer, I have spent my entire career working with legislation. There is the practical side of the matter.
Detective Sergeant Monchamp said that, regardless of the number of consecutive sentences, and despite the best of intentions, one fact remains, and that is that we will see a lot of plea bargaining. I made a joke on this point while he made that comment.
He said that an accused facing eight counts could receive a minimum sentence of six years in prison and consecutive sentences. I would be very surprised if he received a sentence of 48 years in prison upon a review of his file.
As he said, there are so many ways to counter all that. So are we really achieving our goals? Some are concerned about the imposition of consecutive sentences. That is the danger we face because the courts will be handing down shorter sentences that will nevertheless yield virtually the same result as previously.
To my mind, the elephant in the room is the very concept of prostitution. I have not yet formed an idea on the subject, and I am still open in that regard. On the one hand, people are advocating for the rights of sex workers, and, on the other hand, we are trying to pass this act. How far can we go with this kind of bill in a society where certain types of behaviour are not necessarily deemed unacceptable? I wonder about that, and I am curious to hear what you have to say on the subject.
I want to thank our panellists for coming today.
First, on behalf of the committee, I want to thank you individually and the groups you're representing here today for all the work you're doing for victims of this crime in this country, and the work you're doing to make sure that we're aware and we're making laws to curtail this activity.
We are going to go to our next panel, but before we do, a reminder to committee members that we would like your amendments, if you have any, by Friday afternoon, if possible.
For your information, there has been some discussion, and on Monday we will be dealing, for the first hour and 15 minutes, with witnesses, because we have three witnesses. We'll do a half-hour of clause-by-clause, and then we'll do 15 minutes regarding agenda and procedure. We'll set the agenda for the next little while.
This means that next Wednesday there will be no meeting. I know you're all shocked and shamed, but if we can make that happen, that's what will happen.
With that, I will suspend for about three to four minutes.
I am the director of a very small non-profit organization, the Maison de Marthe, in Quebec City. I have been working in the field every day for 12 years with women who are engaged in prostitution.
I am a trained nurse and anthropologist with a specialty in public health. First I worked with those women for five years, helping them restore a balance in their lives so that I could then intervene appropriately. I am in the capital, in Quebec City.
I discovered a tragedy so terrible that I decided to conduct the first ever investigation of male prostitution customers in an attempt to understand why they used prostitution. I subsequently conducted an investigation of two procurers to identify the three principal players involved in prostitution. A book has been published on the subject and I have brought a copy of it here to leave it for reference purposes.
After that, I thought I would retire, but I ultimately got caught up in the work I had done. The following thought came to me: the most important thing is not how you enter prostitution, but how you leave it.
There is no social policy designed simply to assist women when they are involved in prostitution. We have all kinds of programs for women suffering from violence, sexual and other types of abuse, but there is no social policy to assist women or simply to work with them or even offer them the opportunity to leave prostitution.
In view of that situation, I decided to continue the work I had started. I opened a small office in 2006, and volunteers and funding automatically appeared. The Maison de Marthe has been in existence for seven years. Its anniversary is today. It is simply a reception centre to assist women in every possible way in all the stages of the process of leaving prostitution.
Today I would like to offer my expertise to your committee. Rather than start in immediately on the matter of amendments to the bill, I would like to speak to you about the central character in prostitution, who, contrary to what one might generally think, is not the prostitute, since she is its victim.
The central character of prostitution is the customer, for whom this fabulous market of human sexual merchandise is created. Who are these people who look for female prostitutes? They are customers, sexual buyers, men, but not all men. These are certain men. Who are they?
I would like to tell you about them because, if we want to understand prostitution, we cannot do so unless we examine the demand for prostitution, men's motivation in this regard, and consider what is being bought and what kind of relationship they have with these women.
It is constantly stated in the literature that male users of prostitution are ordinary people. However, I want to tell you that they are not ordinary people because ordinary people do not pay for sex. They get up in the morning and they conquer women. After all, we make enough of an effort to please men that it is normal for them to do their share in trying to conquer us.
Real men do not pay for prostitution. Not all men are prostitution users. Studies have produced estimates in an effort to determine how this is done in various countries.
Professor Månsson, a Swedish researcher, has estimated that only 7% of men in Great Britain use prostitutes, whereas the figure rises to 19% in Switzerland, where prostitution is legalized, and to 39% in Spain. The reference is cited in my brief.
What is the difference between all these men? It is not their libido or sexual desire, but their culture and upbringing. It is relations between men and women and the manner in which they have been brought up and constituted culturally.
I can tell you, based on the investigation I conducted, that the first and most important motivation for male prostitution users is non-commitment. They want sex, but they do not want the responsibilities that entails. They say they want a woman in their arms, but not on their hands. I will refrain from commenting on that terrible expression.
They want prostitution because it is easy and it is not a commitment. They do not even want a mistress because they find that burdensome and embarrassing and feel that it raises a host of problems. I could quote you their comments, but I do not have the time. I also think that sex is an irrepressible physiological need for men. In their minds, prostitution is a necessity and a right. Some even feel that the purpose of women is to serve them sexually. You would think we were in the Middle Ages.
They show a distinct preference for a form of sexuality that does not involve a relationship. It must be clearly understood that, in prostitution, there is no preparation for the act. Lubricants and all kinds of tricks are used. They do not want to build a relationship. That moreover is characteristic of prostitution. Nothing could be further from love than prostitution. I feel it is not even sexuality, since sexuality is the giving of what we have that is most precious and intimate. There is no gift in prostitution, and the female prostitute does not give herself. She plays a role, just as the customer plays a role. Prostitution is a sham the sole purpose of which is the man's ejaculation or pleasure, as quickly as possible. As the women say, it is not like marriage. It is urgent and it has to finish quickly.
What male users of prostitution like is sex for the sake of sex, genital contact. I would say it is the McSex of sex. Pardon the terrible expression, but they order up a woman as they would order up a pizza. They call, say what they want and take delivery at home. They have a choice. That is where we stand. They justify their actions by saying that all men use prostitution because their wives do not like sex and they are sexually unsatisfied. However, I determined in my investigation, based on the information they gave me, that that statement is entirely false. From the 84 customers with whom I spoke, I selected 64 for the purposes of the investigation, and only 15.6% of them said they were unsatisfied by sexual intercourse with their wives.
I asked those men whether they had spoken with their wives about everything they told me about their sex lives. They all answered in the negative. I told them that that was the problem, that they should talk about the subject with their wives and win them back. I told them to do something, to take a course, for example, because prostitutes could not be a good substitute.
The analysis also shows that they have a disturbed sexuality. These men suffer from sexual dependence or sexual disorders that involve all kinds of other problems, such as financial and professional problems. They also have problems in their relationships with their wives. In some cases, their deeply disturbed state causes them to transfer or project their psychological problems onto their wives and to resort to violence in order to humiliate and degrade them. They maintain a number of beliefs and prejudices about themselves, about women in general and about female prostitutes in particular.
I have already used up all my speaking time. Do I have one minute left?
There is a close connection between prostitution and slavery. Slave women are the first ones exploited in brothels, followed by women from the poorer classes. According to the UN, more people are bought, sold and transported for sexual exploitation or other purposes today than during the 300 years of slavery. Slavery, although abolished 150 years ago, is still practised in our modern societies. There were 11.5 million victims of the African slave trade, whereas there have been 33 million victims of trafficking for prostitution in Southeast Asia alone.
Trafficking has been carried on differently in recent years, in recruitment, transportation and accommodation, in order to exploit women and children, who constitute the majority of its victims. There were nearly 5 million victims of sexual exploitation between 2002 and 2011. Annual profits generated by the exploitation of trafficking victims are estimated at more than $30 billion. In many places, trafficking governs the “economic health” of the sex industries, which includes pornography, prostitution, sexual tourism and, as mentioned earlier, erotic massage.
There are far more human victims of trafficking for prostitution purposes than there are of trafficking for domestic exploitation purposes or to provide cheap labour. Between 70% and 80% of prostitutes in Canada started working as prostitutes when they were children. There were an estimated 10,000 child prostitutes in Canada in 1997. The mortality rate of women and young girls involved in prostitution in Canada is 40 times higher than the national average. Women prostitutes represent 15% of suicides reported by American hospitals, and the figures are similar for France.
Prostitution is a form of violence in itself. The first act of violence is to subject prostitutes to the sexual pleasure of their customers. The second violent fact is that 90% of individuals become prostitutes as a result of sexual, physical and psychological violence. Kidnapping, rape, slaughter—there are slaughter camps in several European countries where human beings are sold—terror and murder are part of the process of “manufacturing the goods”. These are ways used to render prostituted individuals “functional”.
In the 10 years from 1990 to 2000, 77,500 young foreign women were the victims of traffickers. From 1999 to 2010, 200,000 young foreign women suffered the same treatment. It is often minors who are sold. They have tens and tens of contacts per day. Trafficking and prostitution have risen sharply over the past decade.
The procurers, or pimps, make an enormous amount of money at their victims' expense. They come in various forms: a spouse, someone who places newspaper ads or travel advertisements, a person who says he is your friend, but who is not, or someone in whom you have placed all your trust. Prostitution is not an occupation one chooses freely: it is a system of sexual exploitation. Prostituting oneself means losing one's personality, one's identity, but especially one's dignity.
Legalizing prostitution does not protect women any more than it does children. On the contrary, creating brothels makes them prisoners of the violence of their procurers and customers. Customers are convinced that they can do anything, that they have every right because they pay. In prostitution, the exchange of money does not reduce the level of violence and does not prove that the victims are consenting. On the contrary, it is proof of the rapists' premeditation and of the procurers' profit.
There are no customers, but rather male prostitution users who buy impunity from rape. There are no women, men or children leasing or selling sexual services: there are only victims of sexual violence who, at some point, are forced or compelled to be raped by strangers.
For many, prostitution is a necessary evil, an evil for the woman, but necessary for many men in satisfying their sexual needs. Some people even believe that prostitution can help prevent rape. The Conseil du statut de la femme believes that it is not the best way to calm men's sexual impulses.
Abolishing all forms of prostitution means attacking the rapists' impunity and starting to acknowledge that women and children are full-fledged human beings whose physical integrity may not be violated.
Abolishing the prostitution system is the only solution for living in a humane society. Prostitution has been regulated in the Netherlands since October 1, 2000. That legislation is simply a failure since only 4% of prostitutes are registered. This was supposed to put an end to the prostitution of minors. The Organization for Children's Rights estimates that the number of child prostitutes in the Netherlands rose from 4,000 in 1996 to 15,000 in 2001, including at least 5,000 of foreign origin.
As the Dutch, Greek and Austrian experience has shown, the number of legal prostitutes originally from those countries is gradually declining and the number of prostitutes who are clandestine, illegal or victims of trafficking is on the rise. Legalizing prostitution thus has not improved the lot of prostitutes.
The prostitution of children has risen significantly since legalization. The number of illegal brothels now exceeds the number of legal ones. The illegal industry is now out of control, and trafficking in women and children from other countries has risen sharply. The consequence of legalizing prostitution in certain regions of Australia has been clear growth in the industry.
In 1984, Afeas wanted all prostitution rings to be dismantled and called for severe penalties be imposed on individuals living from the avails of prostitution. At their most recent annual provincial conference last August, Afeas members adopted several positions on prostitution. For example, the association called for the passage of legislation prohibiting prostitution, the criminalization of prostitution customers, social policies to assist individuals wishing to leave the industry and sex education programs in the schools promoting healthy, equal sexuality.
Afeas, which represents 10,000 Quebec women, supports Bill . That bill is entirely consistent with the positions the association adopted at its last conference. It was drafted based on numerous consultations, particularly with officers of the Montreal Police Service's morality section and sexual exploitation of children unit, the Barreau du Québec and women's and victims' rights advocacy groups.
Measures must be taken to facilitate the arrest of procurers and customers. Human trafficking generates more money than drugs. As Ms. Dufour said earlier, there are no resources to assist victims, to accommodate them or to help improve their situation.
Thank you.
Thank you very much for coming to committee today. We appreciate it.
As you know, we're talking about human trafficking. Research is showing us that it's primarily underage youths who are duped and deceived into servicing men, and if they don't do it, they get beaten, raped, shot up with drugs. I've worked with victims for 14 years now, so that's the way it happens.
As you know, in this country, Bill was the first bill, in 2005, that addressed human trafficking. They got one conviction, Imani Nakpangi. He trafficked a 15-and-a-half-year-old girl. You know about that one. Then Bill and Bill came in, in 2010 and 2012. Now we have this bill before us today.
I ran out of time on the other session, but this is why we don't have all the hard statistics, because the bills are so new. They are brand new in Canada.
You mentioned something that I thought was so relevant. I want to talk to Ms. Duval. You talked about human dignity. You talked about the right for people to be free, the right for them to make their own choices. Can you tell me, in terms of this bill of Maria Mourani's, why this is so important to help the victims of human trafficking?
[Translation]
Thank you very much for your work. This is a very important issue.
As you surely know, my colleague Irwin Cotler, who was Minister of Justice, introduced a similar bill. Ms. Mourani's bill adds new elements. This issue is a concern for us. We support this bill because it makes major changes.
However, we are concerned about two provisions. It is important to discuss them in order to find the best solution for everyone.
[English]
I'd like to touch on both of those.
One of them is concurrent sentencing versus consecutive sentencing. We all feel horrified by the kinds of abuse we've been hearing about. It's tempting to think we'll lock someone up and throw away the key, but as one of the members said earlier in the committee, the reality is there are other avenues, like plea bargaining and so on, that will take place that don't achieve that objective.
Mr. Wilks pointed out that if there's a mandatory 30-day suspension of your car, that will prevent you from driving drunk. But we're talking about a different scale. We're talking about 48 years. With respect, I think it diminishes and minimizes this discussion to use that kind of example in terms of deterrence.
There is another way of approaching the norm of concurrent sentencing, and that could be to legislate to reverse that norm, but without removing all discretion. For example, it could be wording like, “The courts shall apply a consecutive sentence unless it is deemed contrary to the interests of justice.”
Can you comment on the idea for the judge to have some ability to apply judgment in a situation where the judge may deem it is not in the interests of justice to apply a consecutive sentence?
Thank you, mesdames. That was definitely interesting, even though it did not necessarily concern the bill. I will not question you as though you were lawyers. That is not why you are here.
Ms. Dufour, you have given me a virtual course in sex education, at least much more than the nuns at the college I attended. They avoided many of the terms you used. We only saw photographs.
Having said that, I believe the issue is hugely important. As I said on Monday, when you come from a city like Gatineau, you do not think of procuring, prostitution or trafficking in persons. Those are dirty words. We imagine that they happen elsewhere, in exotic countries. It was my colleague Joy Smith's bill that in a way opened my eyes to this matter. Even if you read the news, you can never imagine that this happens in your own backyard and that certain types of behaviour in fact occur. This is a manner of speaking, but we are all somehow accessories to all that.
I think you put your finger on the problem. Even if we pass the most severe act there is, we will not be out of the woods. I can only imagine how police officers will enforce this act if it is passed. For example, we will not be able to solve all procuring and human trafficking crimes the day after the bill is passed. Even if there is a presumption, there is no certainty that the individual will not come and testify in favour of her procurer or that she will not refuse to testify. We have an enormous amount of work to do, and we will not resolve all this tomorrow morning. I do not want to end the meeting on a negative note, but I believe we have to end it on a realistic note. We have to be aware that much work remains to be done.
Incidentally, I appreciate the work you are doing at Afeas. I congratulate you on what you are doing in the field. It is extremely important. I appreciated my colleague's question. This does indeed form a whole. The Criminal Code is one of its aspects. As you said, the municipalities are also involved, but they must have by-laws. Not all municipalities have passed by-laws. That requires a certain will. Ms. Dufour, I mentioned the fact that we are accessories. However, permitting a strip bar to operate because it is pays a lot of taxes is a choice that municipalities make. That is part of this whole.
What I am going to say here is mainly a comment. I wanted to vent a little. I do not expect anyone to respond to what I am going to say.
Not so long ago, I went to a reserve in the Maniwaki region. Two young girls had disappeared and police officers spent some time starting an investigation. We all know that, if whites are not involved, it takes a certain amount of time. Authorities suggested that the girls had run away, but the parents were quite convinced that they might have been intercepted by procuring rings, even though the assumption that they had run away was partly justified. People do disappear that way.
We all did silly things when we were young. You can be very well brought up and have good values, but not being intercepted by a ring is sometimes a matter of luck. Things go well for some young people and they make it through. However, others are intercepted and that is unfortunate. They get into drugs and other things of that kind.
I simply mean that we must steer clear of magical thinking and avoid believing that passing a bill will solve everything. Sometimes, however, providing additional tools or sending a message may be equally important. Whatever the case may be, much work remains to be done. That is the only comment I wanted to make.
Thank you.