:
I call to order the 24th meeting of the Standing Committee on the Status of Women.
Good morning to everyone, with a special good morning to our witnesses. I very much appreciate and thank you for finding the time to appear before the committee today on this very important subject we are looking at, the issue of human trafficking.
We will go right to presentations from our witnesses. The last 15 minutes of the meeting will be left for some committee business that we need to attend to.
Members, before we hear from the witnesses, are there any comments to be made? No? All right.
I would like to welcome today the Sisters of Our Lady of Charity of the Good Shepherd, Deborah Isaacs, project coordinator; the Coalition Against Trafficking in Women, Barbara Kryszko, action alert coordinator; and from the Ukrainian Canadian Congress, Irene Sushko. The Future Group is represented by Benjamin Perrin, adviser to the board; it's always nice to have males around when we're doing these interesting subjects.
Please keep your presentations down to approximately five minutes. We will hear from all of you individually, and then we will go around the table for questions and answers. If you could use your five minutes to get in as many points as possible, we would appreciate it.
We will open it up to whoever would like to speak first, your choice.
Ms. Isaacs.
:
Honourable Chair, members of Parliament, on behalf of SCION project, I would like to thank you for the invitation to speak to you on human trafficking.
SCION project is a collaborative effort between MOSAIC, a Vancouver settlement organization that for the past thirty years has been helping newcomers integrate into Canada, and the Sisters of the Good Shepherd, an international Catholic religious congregation located in over 70 countries, an NGO holding a special consultative status with ECOSOC at the United Nations.
Since the end of 2002, we have become more and more involved with the question of human trafficking in collaboration with the Canadian Council for Refugees, the RCMP, the provincial Ministry of the Solicitor General, and other NGOs in the Vancouver area.
In our work we have recognized major problems in the protection of victims of trafficking. The usual definition used is an adaptation of the Palermo Protocol. However, many NGOs have been highly critical of the protocol, notably because it addresses trafficking within the context of organized crime rather than from within the framework of migrants' rights. The protocol does not acknowledge the responsibility of states for creating the conditions within which trafficking flourishes. It frames anti-trafficking measures as migration control measures. Because of this criticism, many NGOs have a much broader view of what was meant by coercion than is meant by authorities, thus leading to uncertainty as to who is a victim and who is not for the purposes of regulations.
Even though Canada has signed the Convention against Transnational Organized Crime and its protocols, it has not incorporated the protection aspects into Canadian law. For the first few years, victims of trafficking continued to be looked on as criminals, and some still are, or at best, illegal migrants, and were rapidly deported. Thus, the only ones getting protection were the traffickers themselves.
In 2004, the RCMP in B.C. were able to offer some sort of protection on an ad hoc basis to victims, and in May 2006, a small positive first step to protection was introduced with the issuing of guidelines for temporary residence permits for victims of trafficking. Regrettably, the government did not consult with NGOs before these guidelines were issued, and since they do not involve new regulations, there are many gaps and problems that will limit their use. There is also no acknowledgment of the special needs of children, who are also covered by the Convention on the Rights of the Child.
The automatic notification of CBSA and/or police on application will be looked on with mistrust by potential victims who are unsure of their status, especially those who self-identify. Many NGOs already fear that a negative decision will lead to deportation, as the person would now appear on CBSA's radar screens. This would not be a problem for those uncovered by police, since they are already known.
Secondly, a potentially bigger problem that may not yet be recognized by many NGOs, because it is not explicitly expressed in the guidelines, is that these permits will be issued only to those who have no status in Canada. Those with legal visitor visas, work permits, student visas, etc., will not receive a TRP but will keep their other visa. The visitor visas, student visas, etc., do not give the victims access to services, so they will not be of much help.
Victims with a TRP of six months or under cannot apply for work permits. I realize the first permit is for reflection only, but how easy will it be to get further ones longer than six months when it is left to the discretion of the officer?
Third, and maybe the most serious problem, is that there is no money allocated to finance services to victims; therefore, there are still no services.
I believe B.C. and Quebec are the only two provinces seriously looking at providing services, and B.C. has a plan that I have included as annex A. However, without financial resources, it cannot be implemented. How can victims with a TRP, which doesn't even allow them to work, provide for themselves for months?
Fourth, the guidelines do not provide for victims who want to return to their country. There is no provision for a dignified return for those wanting to return home. In fact, they may end up in a Catch-22. They can get a TRP and ask their own country to pay for their trip, but many countries are not helpful for a variety of reasons. They can be deported from Canada, but this will not be done if they have a TRP, because they have status. They would have to let the TRP lapse and have no services. Plus, a deportation is not a dignified departure, and they will still be considered illegal immigrants, not even being able to return to Canada without ministerial permission. In all of these scenarios, Canada does not recognize its responsibilities and the fact that it was Canadian demand that brought them here in the first place.
Decriminalization of prostitution is often recommended to cut down on trafficking. I believe in decriminalization of victims because it will allow them to report abusers much more freely, but complete decriminalization of the sex industry has not worked in helping the victims in countries that have tried it. In fact, in many cases, things have worsened. Only about 15% have registered, because even though the work is legal, many still don't want to be identified as sex workers. There will also be those with medical problems who can't register, but that doesn't mean they will stop working. Many don't want the additional expenses of taxes, registration, medicals, etc.
It is also naive to think that pimps and johns, who are often violent, will become less violent because the work is now legal. Victims who are afraid of them will not readily report them, just as battered wives rarely report abusive husbands. It will be more dangerous, because it will be harder for police to get warrants to check on brothels because they are now legal. Brothel owners will be able to get work permits for foreign workers who may, in reality, be victims of trafficking, just as some of the tabletop dancers are victims. It just gives them better coverage.
Finally, the one group that is never considered in the question of decriminalization is the families of the johns. They, too, have rights to be protected. Instead, what I suggest is that Canada look at the Swedish model, which has apparently proven to be helpful.
These are our recommendations: that NGOs be consulted on future guidelines, regulations, and services to be provided; that financial resources be made available for services to victims of trafficking; that dignified and safe arrangements be made for victims who wish to return to their own country; that protection and services to victims be put into Canadian law; and that persons who are not victims of the narrow interpretation of trafficking, but who are victims of exploitation and other criminal offences, be given some sort of protection from automatic deportation if they self-identify.
:
Thank you, Madam Chair.
The Coalition Against Trafficking in Women enthusiastically welcomes this occasion to address the issue of trafficking for the purpose of sexual exploitation. The coalition is an international non-government organization that has been promoting women's human rights for over 18 years.
Trafficking in women and girls for sexual exploitation is a form of violence against women. When a woman or girl is reduced to a commodity to be bought and sold, raped, beaten, and psychologically devastated, her fundamental human rights and dignity are repeatedly violated.
Sex trafficking and prostitution are inextricably linked. The demand for prostituted women and girls is the engine or the root cause that commences and drives the global crisis of sex trafficking. By cutting off demand from buyers, governments eliminate the major source of illicit revenue and profit for traffickers--the payments of buyers--thus reducing the incentive for trafficking.
The coalition has been involved in the drafting of anti-trafficking legislation throughout the world in several jurisdictions. It was involved throughout the drafting stages of the United Nations Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, especially Women and Children, also known as the Palermo Protocol, supplementing the Convention against Transnational Organized Crime, which to date has 110 states parties, including Canada.
With the Palermo Protocol, the international community has agreed upon a definition of trafficking in persons. We can't stress enough the importance that this definition be used and implemented in its entirety. Unfortunately, Canada has failed to use the complete protocol definition in the legislation that has passed thus far. For instance, the protocol definition protects not only those victims who are trafficked by means of force, coercion, abduction, or deception, but also those who are pushed into exploitation by means of abuse of the victim's vulnerability.
The recent European trafficking convention, which is consistent with the UN protocol and its definition, includes the following explanatory note:
By abuse of a position of vulnerability is meant abuse of any situation in which the person involved has no real and acceptable alternative to submitting to the abuse. The vulnerability may be of any kind, whether physical, psychological, emotional, family related, social, or economic. The situation might involve insecurity or illegality of the victim's administrative status, economic dependence, or fragile health. In short, the situation can be of any state of hardship in which a human being is impelled to accept being exploited.
Further, the explanatory report summarizes that the means must be contemplated under the definition to include:
Abduction of women for sexual exploitation, enticement of children for use in pedophile or prostitution rings, violence by pimps to keep prostitutes under their thumb, taking advantage of an adolescent's or adult's vulnerability, whether or not resulting from sexual assault, or abusing the economic and security or poverty of an adult hoping to better their own or their family's lot.
Indeed, in recognizing the wide and inclusive scope of the trafficking definition, as well as the close relationship between prostitution and sex trafficking, the UN special rapporteur on trafficking in persons has found the following:
For the most part, prostitution as actually practised in the world usually does satisfy the elements of trafficking. It is rare that one finds a case in which the path to prostitution and/or a person’s experiences within prostitution do not involve, at the very least, an abuse of power and/or an abuse of vulnerability.
Power and vulnerability in this context must be understood to include power disparities based on gender, race, ethnicity and poverty. Put simply, the road to prostitution and the life within “the life” is rarely one marked by empowerment or adequate options.
Thus it is imperative that policies and practices addressing sex trafficking also address prostitution, since so many prostituted persons have been trafficked.
Another key aspect of the definition of trafficking of the Palermo Protocol is paragraph 3(b), which states that “the consent of a person” shall be “irrelevant” where any of the means in paragraph 3(a) have been used. In order to protect all victims of trafficking, including those who may initially “consent” to their exploitation and who have been abused because of their position of vulnerability, it is crucial to respect the entire definition of trafficking so that traffickers cannot use consent of the victim in their defence.
Thus it may be that some trafficked women are aware that they may be prostituted in their country of destination, and may even have been involved in prostitution in their home countries. This so-called consent is a reflection of the deeply desperate situations in which many women live and should not exempt the traffickers from legal responsibility when the means of trafficking are used and the element of exploitation becomes present.
The UN protocol is clear that trafficked persons, including those in prostitution, are no longer considered criminals, but crime victims, and have a right to extensive protection. For instance, article 6 provides that each state party consider implementing measures to assist in a victim's recovery, including access to medical, psychological, material assistance, housing, employment, and educational and training opportunities. Canada should provide this comprehensive assistance to victims, and it currently falls short in its legislation and funding, as my colleague has pointed out.
Since I'm limited in time, I will just point out that the Palermo Protocol also has a provision on demand, and a country's approach to prostitution is critical in having an impact on the demand. We support the Swedish model, which I know you've heard about several times, and are concerned about countries where prostitution is legalized, since the demand for both legal and illegal prostitution increases, as does the incidence of trafficking. While some local jurisdictions in Canada have made efforts to target the demand, more comprehensive national efforts are necessary to combat trafficking by eradicating the demand.
Finally, I have a few recommendations based upon our extensive research and experience.
We urge the committee study to enforce implementation of preventative measures, such as public education campaigns, about the harms of trafficking in prostitution, including campaigns targeting men and boys to challenge the attitudes and practices of potential perpetrators of sexual exploitation.
We endorse increased support and services for survivors of both international and domestic trafficking and prostitution, and the promotion of effective laws against trafficking, prostitution, and related forms of sexual exploitation consistent with the UN protocol, including provisions criminalizing the demand for trafficking and prostitution.
We recommend the development of training programs for government bodies, such as law enforcement and immigration, to hold perpetrators, including traffickers, pimps, and buyers, accountable rather than criminalizing the victim.
Finally, we urge rejection of government policies promoting prostitution, whether through legalization or decriminalization of the sex industry.
Thank you.
:
Honourable Chair and members of Parliament, recently in the “Canada/World” section of the
The Hamilton Spectator, the headline in big, bold letters read “12 Million People in Bondage”. It immediately captured the reader's attention. The question in one's mind became, “What is this issue that has 12 million people in bondage?” With true astonishment, the reader soon realizes that those referred to as being in bondage are in fact victims of human trafficking.
The issue of trafficking is of great concern to the Ukrainian Canadian Congress, its 27 member organizations, and the general Ukrainian Canadian community, as it is to all other citizens of Canada. Trafficking is a high-profit, low-risk enterprise, often with strong links to organized crime. Trafficking across international borders, as we know, affects more than 800,000 persons a year, and most are trafficked into the sex trade either against their will or under coercive circumstances. Sadly, 80% of these are women and girls and up to 50% are minors. Trafficking of humans constitutes horrific acts of slavery, the shameful assault on the dignity of children, the exploitation of the vulnerable for profit. It has become the second fastest-growing crime in the world.
More and more women are leaving their homelands in search of a better life and are ending up as victims of trafficking in human beings and of prostitution. They are promised honest jobs, but upon arrival are forced to work as prostitutes to pay off the cost of their trip. In pursuing their dream, they find themselves living a nightmare.
Victor Malarek's book, The Natashas, very explicitly reveals many of the ways in which this criminal element carries out its mission. The true-life incidents related in this book are shocking and unbelievable.
I have a brief quote from his book:
What happens to most trafficked women, whether they were tricked, abducted or willing is criminal. They are forced into situations of profound terror, comparable to being held hostage. They are immediately deprived of their travel documents and their every movement is tightly controlled and restricted. Potential buyers test-drive the women, much like the way we test-drive new cars.
We cannot allow these atrocities against humankind to continue. Although we are pleased with the announcement this past summer by the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration regarding some new measures to assist the victims of human trafficking in Canada, there certainly is a great deal more that must be done in this respect.
As a result of a round table on this topic chaired by Irena Soltys, chair of the coalition against trafficking, the Ukrainian Canadian Congress passed a resolution in October of 2004 directing the congress to sensitize the Government of Canada and relevant federal agencies on this issue and to support projects initiated within the community to raise awareness of this horrific crime.
One of the ways we chose to implement this resolution was to partner with Member of Parliament Joy Smith to raise awareness of this crime against humanity. As well, we have addressed the issue with both the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration and the Minister of Foreign Affairs.
The following are some of the concerns raised during our discussions, along with some recommendations.
Those guilty of these crimes against humanity must be found and appropriately dealt with. Existing legislation must be strictly enforced, including penalties of up to life imprisonment and fines of up to $1 million for conviction for trafficking in persons.
Trafficked persons may be reluctant to go to police or to doctors for assistance; therefore, a 1-800 hotline number must be established and clearly made available. Shelters must be made available, where victims can seek refuge and protection. Welcome packages must include the above information, as well as instructions regarding the protection of one's passport.
Customs officers must be made aware of the intricacies of the traffickers and the influence they have on the victims and must be skilled in recognizing these improprieties. A service-wide mandatory training program must be initiated.
And we're suggesting the age of consent must be raised from 14 to 16.
Internationally, the Government of Canada should work toward greater cooperation in striving to eliminate transnational trafficking trade and organized crime rings, working with consulates of sending countries to ensure trafficking awareness of visa applicants, and rehabilitating and assisting victims' safe return home. Canada's role as a signatory of the UN Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons must be made a top priority.
Together we must strive for total abolition of human trafficking. Future generations will not be helped by those who turn a blind eye to this vicious crime today. We have a duty in this respect, and we cannot stand idly by and allow these atrocities to continue. We must turn our outrage into action, and we very strongly urge the Canadian government to be a leader in this respect.
Thank you.
:
Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Good morning.
Does every member of the committee have a copy of our brief? I'll be referring to it in the interests of time. Okay, great. So I'll submit that for the committee's consideration. I'm just going to focus today on what I think are the top level recommendations and proposals that The Future Group has.
To start with, we're honoured to be here. Our organization was founded in 2000 by a group of university students sitting around a lake and talking about this problem of human trafficking that we heard about six years ago. It's an honour to be here finally in Ottawa to talk before you today about it. So thank you very much for the opportunity, and I applaud you for studying this problem.
As many of you know, our organization started doing its work overseas. We've led on-the-ground fieldwork projects with victims in Cambodia, Myanmar, Romania, Moldova, and, most recently, this summer in Ecuador and in Cameroon. Our attention focused back on Canada, on Calgary--I'm from Calgary originally--when the police raided a massage parlour and found, lo and behold, women from Southeast Asia. People have since forgotten about that story; that was in 2003.
Since then we've started to focus on this issue in Canada on a policy level. Based on our experience overseas, we've developed essentially a three-point framework. It's outlined on page 1. It starts to balance some of the concerns this committee has heard today and in previous witness testimony about how do you balance the law enforcement aspects, the human rights aspects, the economic aspects. This is our approach.
First is prevention of human trafficking by working with source countries to address the root causes, which involve a lack of knowledge, so educating at-risk children. Organizations educate 80,000 at-risk children in rural Cambodia, for example, dealing with the situation there. Also, direct foreign aid to increasing economic opportunities for young women. That's the first part of the framework.
The second part of the framework is protection of trafficking victims. This includes both the rescue and then subsequently the rehabilitation, or where appropriate, repatriation, and then their reintegration into society, whether it's appropriate for them to go home or not.
The final part is the prosecution of traffickers and commercial sex users in criminal proceedings. So it's all three that you need; otherwise, it's just a drop in the bucket and progress is difficult, if not impossible.
Many of you are familiar with the report that our organization published in March of this year called Falling Short of the Mark. It was an international study on the treatment of human trafficking victims, and I'm embarrassed to say Canada got a failing grade. The summary of our report is in pages 2 to 4 of our brief, and if you're interested in the full version with all the comparative examples, it's on our website, which is www.thefuturegroup.org. I apologize for the shameless plug, Madam Chair, of our website.
I do want to draw your attention in particular to page 3 of our brief. This is a case study that is cited in our report in a footnote. We were told after our report that, no, there's no evidence that trafficking victims are deported, it's all anecdotal, it doesn't happen. Here's an official report from the Federal Court judicially reviewing a decision of the Immigration and Refugee Board.
It's the case of Katalin Varga, one of the few that made it up this high. You can only wonder how she had the legal resources to make it so high. I don't know; someone must have been supporting her. I'd like you to read on page 4 here, and this is a summary of the case from the reporter:
Varga's doctor indicated she was suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder and would suffer a complete psychological breakdown if she were returned to Hungary.
She was found to be a bona fide human trafficking victim. Canada's response: deport her. This is the current state of the law. We now have interim guidelines that begin to address this problem. Our organization applauded the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration when these were announced. I agree with the comments earlier; it's a good starting point, and more can be done.
Some of you are aware I was involved in that process as well. I'm not here to talk about my capacity in that, but just to say that our approach has been internationally that you want to make measurable steps. I would caution the committee against trying to come up with a grand national plan all at once. First of all, by the time you come up with the plan, the traffickers have already moved on.
We need to support projects that are working, focus our efforts in areas of greatest concern, both geographically...and I'd point out that Vancouver, with the coming Vancouver Winter Olympics, should be a major concern of this committee. By 2010, if Canada does not have its act together on combating human trafficking, there will be a surge of human trafficking in British Columbia. International practice at every major world sporting event in the last decade, in addition to peacekeeping missions, has shown that a large influx of that hard currency and foreigners with a lot of time on their hands and a sense of impunity will essentially drive this industry. You have to approach it from a crude angle, which is a business angle sometimes, and you can see that the traffickers will see this as a windfall.
I'll leave for your consideration our recommendations, which are set out in our brief on page 7. We've called for the creation of a counter-trafficking office. I'd like to answer questions, if you have them, about why that's needed, but I'll have to defer those to the question period, since I'm out of time.
Thank you again for the opportunity today.
:
Just briefly, on your first question, with respect to the interim guidelines, this is the challenge that I spoke about earlier, which is that there are so many pieces to the puzzle. As you know, there is a 17-member interdepartmental working group. The analogy I came up with is that it's like having a three-legged race, but it's a 17-person, three-legged race. You're going to go as slowly as the last person who's with you.
The reason I make that analogy is that you have these immigration guidelines, which are designed to do what they can from an immigration perspective, but then you also have law enforcement pieces. Then you have provincial matters with respect to housing and legal aid and these other additional pieces that are really required to get the whole package. A lot of the concerns that are being raised are about the fact that the guidelines don't do enough. Well, they can't. Certainly there are areas in which there are gaps, and they were identified I think quite well by Ms. Isaacs. I think the process of improving on the guidelines is one that should happen once there's been time to see how they work in practice.
I should add that it's been reported in the media that there were six women who were offered the protection of the guidelines already this summer. They decided to turn them down. That, actually, is not necessarily a bad thing. When the media was coming up...before the guidelines, people were saying that anyone could claim to be a trafficking victim and try to cram their way in. That's not happening, and that hasn't happened in other jurisdictions.
Canada should be confident in offering sufficient protection, as required under the international protocols, so that this can be carefully done in a way that will not abuse our country's generosity.
:
Thank you, Madam Chair. I thank all of you for your testimony.
My question is for Mr. Perrin. In your recommendations, on page 8 of your brief, you say, and I quote:
With recent amendments to the Criminal Code and the CIC Interim Guidelines, a basic legal framework is now in place and will allow Canadian authorities to begin to address the challenge of human trafficking.
We met a morality investigator from the City of Montreal Police Department last week, I believe. He seemed to be saying that the law was not very effective in helping them do their work. In fact, he clearly stated that the section of the Criminal Code on human trafficking was not used at all by the MPD.
Is the law really effective? Should improvements be made to the Criminal Code? To what section of the law? Is it the one on procuring, trafficking or having a bawdy house? Firstly, what should be amended, concretely, in the act, in the Criminal Code?
Secondly, what must we do so that sex tourism abroad and the actions of persons who partake in sex tourism do not remain unpunished? What needs to be changed in the law?
Lastly, you say that the Interdepartmental Working Group on Trafficking in Persons (IWGTIP) — and you will correct me on this if I am wrong — is ineffective, in some ways, or has simply not fulfilled its mandate well. You propose to replace it by the Canadian Counter-Human Trafficking Office.
I would like to understand what this office would be and what it would do differently from the IWGTIP that would make it more effective.
First, on the child sex tourism issue, it is very difficult to engage in extraterritorial investigations. There's no doubt about that. The only successful prosecution was with respect to Donald Bakker in British Columbia. He was the first man convicted under the child sex tourism law, and that was an accidental investigation. That he had sexually exploited children abroad was only discovered after his computer was seized.
So how do other countries do it? That's sort of our approach. Other countries are regularly prosecuting their foreign pedophiles who go abroad. And they really operate with impunity. In Cambodia, you can see them walking down the street arm in arm with girls who are 8, 9, or 10 years old, and there's absolutely nothing you can do about it there.
They deal with it through liaison officers in the embassies. The Australian federal police have liaison officers. The Americans have law enforcement officers, not in every embassy, but in the focused, highest-risk areas. They don't just work on human trafficking and child sex tourism; they also deal with drug trade issues and other transnational organized crimes. So it's largely an enforcement issue at this point.
The RCMP have been given information about Canadian pedophiles operating abroad, as detailed as passport copies, trip manifests, and even witness statements. We were able to provide them with these types of evidence. We actually participated successfully in the prosecution of an American pedophile, using the same model. The Americans were able to send a team, they investigated, and this resulted in a conviction.
Unfortunately, the way our law works, when we have a foreign pedophile operating abroad like this—bouncing between countries and never coming back to Canada—there's no way to get him. Also you're not able to hold Canadian citizens at the border when they return, unless you have enough evidence against them to result in an arrest warrant. So it is very difficult, but it can be done, and the answer, in our view, is resources and a liaison officer program.
Now, on the question of the interdepartmental working group, why would an office be better? The main issue we see is there needs to be a central focal point for funding for human trafficking, because right now we'd be at a loss to say there is any funding going to human trafficking, other than for the meetings of the interdepartmental working group and the poster campaign at the federal level. So there needs to be a focal point, which is also important for accountability.
We see this office as being able to develop and propose initiatives that go back to the individual departments that are involved. So rather than having 17 departments around the table discussing what would really involve programs in only two or three of them, why not have a central office with expertise in human trafficking, bring together the best people in Canada to work in this office, give them the funding they need, and give them a mandate to liaise with the relevant departments?
We see this as a new approach that could work. Other countries have done so, and it has resulted in increased accountability—and, I should add, the office would report to Parliament. There should be a report to Parliament on how many victims have been assisted, how many have been repatriated, and how many traffickers have been investigated and charged. This is information that as a country we don't have right now.
:
Thank you, Madam Chair.
I want to thank all the presenters today. Indeed, it's very important that you're here today educating us and helping us on this very horrific crime that has to be stopped.
My first question is for Mr. Perrin.
I'm very interested in what you say about the human trafficking office. I would agree with you that there is absolutely no focal point with expertise, somewhere someone can go for assistance.
We talked about funding. Let's say, hypothetically, if an office such as this was set up, they would have input into the funding and where the funding should go.
I was meeting this morning with a group of people who took care of homeless shelters. As we all know, human-trafficked people need a shelter, but the shelters we currently have are not adequate. In my view, it needs to be shelters because they need some time. You can't just apprehend or rescue trafficked persons and then have them testify. It doesn't work. A lot of them are very afraid of police. They've been intimidated over months or years, and that doesn't work.
In terms of an office like this, where would you predict funding would go that would usefully address...?
I agree, number one, that the age of consent has to be raised. Number two, consent shouldn't even be an issue when people are apprehended. They are helpless victims of a horrific crime.
We have a unique situation here because some of these women also come with small children, if they become pregnant. One woman in Toronto I've been working with from Mexico has a 10-month-old daughter. There are different kinds of things these people need.
Could you comment on that, Mr. Perrin, in terms of shelters and the differences between what we know now and what should be there?
:
I will start with the funding issue. As you pointed out, it's the biggest issue right now. I don't know what the amount would be. Thomas Axworthy has said $100 million for human trafficking initiatives is required. I think that sounds like a reasonable figure. It certainly sounds round, and I'm not sure what went into that.
We would propose that the best use of the funds would be to go back to that three-point framework. The money should ideally be following the victim. That's what you want to do in any social program. It's very difficult to do in something like health care where all Canadians are involved, but in something like human trafficking, where we're actually only talking about maybe 25 to 30 victims in the first year, the guidelines are up and operating. That's how it's played out in Australia and the United States. You should essentially have packages for various victims. Some victims will require a work permit and housing; others who want to be returned home as soon as possible will not. That program needs to be developed, and this office can play a role in that.
Sufficient funding for that could easily come from that $100 million. We're not actually talking about a lot of money when it comes to the victim assistance side. That's a bill the federal government could opt to fill, but certainly under its jurisdiction it wouldn't be required to.
On the prosecution side, it's only a drop in the bucket if you're just dealing with victims. Here's how your criminal justice system would work. For people who commit murder, a break and enter, and shoplifting, we're not going to send them to court any more. All we're going to do is say to someone, did you have your car broken into? Come to the government, we'll help you fix it. If someone was killed, we'll give you some counselling. No, don't worry about the murderer who's on the street or the person robbing your houses.
That's essentially what's going on right now with respect to human trafficking, not for any lack of hard work by the law enforcement agencies. They've seen it and they've told us they're not properly funded to do this. That's a huge piece, and it is probably the biggest dollar amount required with respect to getting into these organized criminal networks.
:
First of all, it's the money. Most of us are strapped as it is, especially some of us in the settlement area in certain provinces.
I know in B.C. they're looking at having some NGO and government personnel go out with the police on a raid to take charge of the victims so they're not further traumatized and scared by police contact .
They were also talking about some advocacy from NGOs on behalf of the victims, who may not, at times, have legal help--and that's another area I forgot to mention earlier when we talked about services.
As I say, the agency I work with in Vancouver has been named the lead agency in B.C., whenever some money is available, to do case management and allocate what's needed.
There will be needs assessments. There will be databases that have to be built up of services available in each province, and there has to be developed communication between provinces. I worked in Montreal before. We had a young lad who was in domestic labour at age 13. After much prodding, they finally started investigating, and the family picked up and moved to Ontario. If there's no communication from one province to another, things get dropped. In some cases, you do have to move people from one province for their own safety.
Another suggestion I would make, trying to catch some of this, is for some communication between immigration and education, at least for children, so that you can pick up who's coming in but is not going to school. At the moment there is absolutely none. Of course, these victims are not going to school.
It's just a way of trying to get some control. All of this takes money.
:
I think it has to be a combination. You cannot do just one. I mean, we don't have access to all the people.
I'm on an NGO-CIC immigration working group for separated children. I know that what's happening there is that they're just looking at refugees. They're not even considering victims of trafficking in their counts. The way they're counting those separated children is as the primary claimants in refugee claims. This is leaving a whole wide area not even counted. There's no way of checking.
Also, when people are met coming in with so-called relatives, friends, and so on, there's not always a check at the border on whether these people are really what they say they are.
I went to The Bay once in Vancouver to get a bathing suit, and a clerk there told me that they have this man who comes in, and he's very often with different young women. He seems to have a lot of nieces he's buying this skimpy clothing for. They're coming to him sort of as relatives, and nobody checks on it. It's a problem.
We also have in Vancouver the Honduran children and youth. It's a major problem. These children are still being criminalized as drug dealers, because they're in the drug industry. They have debt bondage, and of course the question of consent for children should never even be considered.
So it's a problem.
:
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you to the panel today. Just when I think we've heard testimony that won't continue to alarm, that exactly becomes the case. I really appreciate the time you've taken to come and join us today and offer these insights.
Sister Isaacs' presentation made some comments with respect to the definition of the Palermo Protocol. It highlighted a couple of the points where the NGOs have actually been critical.
This was in your opening comments, Ms. Isaacs. After your presentation, Madam Kryszko actually spoke in terms of comments that were rather supportive of the Palermo Protocol with respect to identifying. There was a little disconnect there.
I wonder, Ms. Kryszko, if you could perhaps speak to some of those comments. Just to remind you what they were, you said essentially that the Palermo Protocol addresses trafficking within the context of organized crime rather than within the framework of migrant rights, and further, that it frames anti-trafficking measures as migration control measures. You seem to have a really good handle on the legal context here. Would you be prepared to comment on those criticisms?
:
Well, first of all, I mentioned that the definition used here is an adaptation of the Palermo Protocol, which is not exactly what we have here. But there are certain things that are questionable.
Sometimes live-in caregivers who are brought over and exploited, and sometimes raped, by their employers can leave. They're not threatened in the same way; they have a legal status. But because of certain pressures, etc., they're afraid to leave because they may not get another job, which is important. There's criminality, right, and exploitation. I'm not saying these are part of all cases of live-in caregivers, but in certain cases these have been used, and they would not come under trafficking as interpreted by, let's say, the police, etc. But there are other criminal events involved in it, and I think these people need some sort of protection too, to make it easier for them so they're not punished for coming forth.
As for other areas, I've seen people coming from countries where no visa is required. They promise them things like English language and some work; they pay the way here for these people, where they pay a fee to an agency who places them in an exploitive situation. The people don't get the English and they don't get what was promised, etc., but they can leave.
It seems to me that we're always talking about the effects of horrific crime; we're dealing with the aftermath of something dreadful that has happened to human beings.
I noted in your presentation that you talked about prevention and the question of decriminalization, but there's also a piece in which you talk about international and national economic policies, globalization, of various countries, like Cameroon, Cambodia, and Myanmar--Burma--which we know has the worst human rights record in the world.
I wonder if you can draw a correlation between the kinds of global and trade treaties that places like Canada has with these countries and prevention. What should we be doing in terms of our acceptance of cheap labour, cheap goods, in places like Wal-Mart and stores around the country, that come from these countries, to change that economic paradigm in favour of helping people so that they don't end up victims, so that they don't end up being economically deprived and in brothels?
Again, I'd like to thank all of the presenters. It has certainly been interesting information that we received from you today.
We've talked a lot about protection for the victims. We've talked a lot about the different countries you've worked in, and so on. But there's one thing we haven't talked about very much today that we heard from other witnesses. Some of them are suggesting that to successfully combat trafficking, we need to have a greater focus on the demand side of the situation.
I'm going to ask a very brief question, and then I'd like each of you to respond, if you could. What kinds of suggestions would you have for this government to work on the demand side of it so the victims are protected, but we'd be looking at decreasing the situations because we're going to be working on the demand side with johns, the pimps, and so on?
Could I hear your opinions on that, please, from whoever wants to start?
:
I'm not totally familiar with the legislation.
Obviously, legislation has to be reviewed from time to time, depending on situations and what is arising. I think a review of the legislation to make sure we are meeting all the needs of this issue is important. But certainly, what exists must be enforced. Penalties, perhaps, should be increased. We should look at that.
As well, we need to have some type of roster, such as we have for pedophiles, some way of identifying these people and making sure we know who they are. They seem to be able to skim right out of one situation and into another. I think the awareness, for the community, for the police, and everyone else, to be able to identify these people when they see them, is important.
The training that I spoke about, a service-wide, mandatory training program, should be initiated with everyone participating and being made aware.
:
As I mentioned before, we do support the Swedish model. One thing about the Swedish model is that law enforcement has to be trained in the law. They have to receive gender sensitization when it comes to implementation. That is one aspect that would have to be part of any approach.
Certainly, as I also said, prosecution and strong penalties--probably stronger than they already are--are necessary for the buyers. There are well-intentioned programs, such as the john schools. But sometimes, someone will not be penalized and not have a criminal record because they complete the john school. If there is something like a john school, we would want that person to receive a criminal record, not just a one-day training program.
Also, we think a national education campaign is important, to infuse in different aspects of education--for example, with young boys--that women are not for sale. I think that has to be happening at an earlier age. We need to start looking at boys and saying that prostitution is not okay. They're basically growing up to see it as something that's acceptable. I think when you tackle issues like sexuality, that can be brought up: that prostitution and objectifying women are not okay.
In countries such as Sweden and in cities such as Madrid, there have been poster and other campaigns targeting men, saying that prostitution and trafficking exists because you're there, because there is the demand, and that sex is not for sale. This message, that it is not acceptable to buy women, has been spread throughout the country. We think those types of campaigns are important.
:
I'll be brief, since I think we're almost out of time.
It's important to distinguish the types of sex users we're talking about. There are essentially two types. There are the occasional sex users, who are people driving down the street late at night and for whatever reason decide this is the night they're going to pick up a prostitute. Or, in Cambodia, for example, they are tourists and backpackers. We've seen them, actually. These are young men, my age, who will just decide to walk in so they can tell their friends they did it. Those are the occasional people. These are the people you can really target with a deterrence message and for which programs such as john school can work. We think that you really want to focus your efforts on them, the majority of the sex users.
Then, be very, very clear when you're targeting the habitual users, especially pedophiles. At sentencing, there need to be expert submissions as to what harm is done to a child when they are abused. I think that's how you'll ratchet up your sentences. It's not necessarily by increasing the maximum penalty; it's by getting that information in front of a judge who's making the ultimate decision. That's something our police and prosecutors could work on. It certainly could also be considered an aggravating factor if the victim has been trafficked.
These are ideas I'm throwing out for the committee to consider. I'll leave it at that for now.
:
Thank you, Madam Chair.
[Translation]
Madam Chair, I’d like to go over the background for all this.
In the beginning, when we first began to sit as a committee, we discussed for hours the possibility of studying the issue of human trafficking, but we had other priorities. We undertook other reviews, such as on the economic security of women. We talked about it at length.
I understand that Ms. Smith tabled a motion in May because it was one of her concerns. In September, our committee decided to study the issue of human trafficking. That is a good thing. A report will be tabled.
So, what could be more normal than to strengthen our position?
Ms. Smith tabled a motion in the House of Commons on the international trafficking of women, and the committee has the same concern with regard to Canada. We could table a report asking the government to take our concerns into account when deciding on its comprehensive strategy to combat human trafficking.
That’s all, there’s no problem there.
:
It's a procedure issue. Technically, we are in the middle of a study. At the end of the study, our committee will agree and we'll put forth a report, and the number one recommendation probably will be this.
Again, it's a procedure issue. Normally we'd wait and the whole committee would put it in. It will be in the report. But you have tabled it. You are entitled to table it, and it is rightfully before us.
Would the committee like a vote on this, or is this unanimous?
Some hon. members: It's unanimous.
(Motion agreed to—[See Minutes of Proceedings])
An hon. member: Nobody was going to vote against it.
The Chair: It's unanimous. The motion is carried.
On Thursday, we have Victor Malarek coming, and we'll also be viewing the video from the RCMP. It's really important that we try to get the other guys out early so that we have our time, along with an hour to discuss the draft report.
Thank you. The meeting is adjourned.