|
BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS
POLITICAL AND JUDICIAL MANIPULATION ON THE
PROSTITUTION ISSUE
The former minority Liberal government lived
and breathed for the sole objective of holding onto power.
To this end, it was willing to undertake any legislation that
would find favour with the two opposition parties in Parliament,
the NDP and the more leftist, Bloc Québécois.
Thus, when NDP MP Libby Davies (Vancouver - East) brought
a motion to the House of Commons in February 2003, to review
the prostitution laws in Canada, the Liberals were delighted
to back her motion, which passed easily with the Liberal and
the two left wing opposition parties' support.
Work began on the review in October, 2003.
It quickly ended, however, after just five meetings because
Parliament was prorogued due to the election being called.
After the 2004 federal election, the Liberal Minister of Justice
Irwin Cotler, who was also determined to change the prostitution
laws, wrote to the chairman of the House of Commons Justice
Committee, on November 19, 2004, requesting that the sub-committee
on prostitution be re-constituted because of the "need
to more adequately protect individuals in prostitution against
exploitation, violence and abuse".
The sub-committee was quickly re-constituted
with only one member from the Conservative party, Art Hanger
(Calgary North-East), battling alone against the majority
Liberal, NDP and BQ members of the Committee, who were all
in favour of widening the prostitution laws. This sub-committee
heard testimony from approximately 300 witnesses from January
to May, 2005, including more than a hundred individuals who
were prostitutes. (See Committee's Report, "The Challenge
of Change: A Study of Canada's Criminal Prostitution Laws,"
page 3.)
However, before the Committee's report was
finalized, Parliament was again dissolved, in November, 2005,
with another election to take place in January, 2006.
When Parliament resumed sitting under the
newly elected minority Conservative government, in February
2006, the opposition still held the majority of seats on the
Justice Committee. The majority voted to resume the work of
the sub-committee on prostitution. This latter re-constituted
committee was to be composed this time of six members - two
from the Conservative party, two from the Liberal party and
one member each from the NDP and Bloc Québécois.
Although Conservative MP Art Hanger finally had the support
of another Conservative on the sub-committee, the two Conservatives
were, nonetheless, outnumbered by the four opposition members.
The sub-committee was required to submit its report to the
full Justice Committee on December 8, 2006. This report was
to include all the findings of the two previous sub-committees
on prostitution, which had been acquired during the life of
two different Parliaments.
Prostitution Sub-Committee Rises Up Like
a Phoenix
It is noteworthy, that this prostitution sub-committee
kept rising up again and again like a Phoenix from the ashes
of previous Parliaments in order to continue with its work
to revise the prostitution law.
This process was in sharp contrast to the
Committee set up in 2003 to review the issue of same-sex marriage.
Although that Committee had traveled across the country visiting
12 cities, hearing testimony from 500 witnesses and dealt
with over 250,000 pieces of correspondence, its report had
not been finalized when Parliament recessed for the summer
of 2003: the Committee was expected to finish its report when
Parliament sat again that September. However, the Committee's
work was pre-empted by the Minister of Justice Martin Cauchon,
when he produced a draft of same-sex marriage legislation
(Bill C-38) and announced that a non-binding reference was
to be made to the Supreme Court of Canada to determine the
constitutionality of his Bill. That is, the Liberal government
did not want to hear the Committee's findings, which it understood
would oppose same-sex marriage. As a result, the Liberal government
did not permit the Committee to continue its work and the
committee never sat again so it could not complete its report.
It seems that when the Liberals want to hear
a committee report, such as the one on prostitution, they
make sure the committee continues sitting, even over the life
of several Parliaments, regardless of the fact that the Committee's
work would, under normal circumstances, have ceased when Parliament
was prorogued. However, when the Liberals don't want to hear
a Committee's report, they devise ways to ignore that Committee,
even though it is still technically sitting, since the Parliament
which established the Committee was still in existence.
Sub-Committee on Prostitution's Final Report
To the chagrin of the opposition members on
the prostitution sub-committee, the two Conservative members
on the committee, Art Hanger a former Calgary policeman who
had considerable experience dealing with prostitution, and
Patricia Davidson (Sarnia - Lambton) refused to go along with
the majority position on the committee to decriminalize prostitution.
Instead, they struggled vigorously against that majority position.
As a result, the chairman, regretfully, had to announce, when
he submitted his report to the full Justice Committee in December
2006, that there was no consensus on the sub-committee as
to what action should be taken on this issue.
This outcome was profoundly disappointing
to the Liberals, NDP and BQ who had hoped to use the Committee's
report as a platform to decriminalize prostitution. The lack
of a consensus was also profoundly disappointing to homosexual
activists. They had been relying on MP Libby Davies, a self-acknowledged
lesbian, to have the committee recommend the elimination of
the Criminal Code provisions prohibiting bawdy houses (places
where "indecent acts" occur), as these provisions
have been used by the police to conduct raids on gay bathhouses
and other sexual meeting places.
According to MP Libby Davies, "Art Hanger
did everything in his power to slow down the release of this
report" (Xtra West Dec. 21, 2006). Long time Montreal
homosexual activist Michael Hendricks stated in the same issue
of Xtra West, "
Hanger and the other Conservative
committee member are a constant obstacle to consensus. Working
with someone like Hanger is like trying to run with an enormous
black iron ball chained to your leg." Obviously, Mr.
Hanger did an excellent job.
Judges to Settle Prostitution Issue
Frustrated by the Conservatives' refusal to
bend to the will of left-wing activists, the latter have now
decided to resort to the tried and true method of changing
laws in Canada by arranging for politically appointed judges,
in this case, the Ontario courts, to do the job for them.
The Ontario courts have long established a reputation of ignoring
legal principles and legal precedents by re-writing the law
to suit their own ideology. For example, the Ontario courts
ordered the legalization of marijuana for medical purposes,
even though there was not a scintilla of evidence that marijuana
provides medical benefits. The Ontario judges also declared
that common law relationships were equivalent to legal marriages.
The latter decision was handed down by former Ontario Court
of Appeal Judge Louise Arbour, also formerly a member of the
Supreme Court of Canada, and now High Commissioner of the
UN Human Rights Council in Geneva. Ms. Arbour, who never married,
was living common law with the father of her three children
at the time that she handed down the decision supporting legal
benefits for common law couples. Other decisions of the ever
"progressive" Ontario courts were the decision to
support same-sex marriage, and more recently, the decision
to redefine the family to legally recognize three-parent families
(two lesbians and a sperm donor). See article "Ontario
Court Legalizes Three-parent Family".
Access to Court Provided by Way of Leftist
Professors
The court challenge is being undertaken by
a prostitutes' association called Sex Professionals of Canada,
led by long-time Toronto prostitute, Valerie Scott, as well
as homosexual activists.
Unfortunately for them, they no longer have
access to the taxpayers' money by way of the notorious Court
Challenges Program, which was eliminated by the Conservative
government in September, 2006. Therefore, their legal challenge
of the prostitution law is to proceed with the assistance
of the York University law faculty, at Osgoode Hall in Toronto,
as professors there have agreed to prepare the court challenge
on behalf of the prostitutes' association and homosexual activists.
This is not the first time that law professors from Osgoode
Hall have initiated left-wing legal challenges. It was a professor
from that institution who brought the marijuana as medicine
court challenge.
The court challenge to re-write Canada's prostitution
law commenced in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice in
January, 2007.
The fix is in for judicial activism to arbitrarily
change the prostitution laws in Canada.
P.S.
It is important, however, that we acknowledge
the excellent work of MP Art Hanger on the prostitution
sub-committee. He did an outstanding job under very trying
circumstances. We seem always ready to criticize our MP's
- but rarely do we thank them - and this is an excellent
opportunity to do so.
Please write to Mr. Hanger at the following
address:
Mr. Art Hanger, MP
Confederation Building, Room 530
House of Commons
Parliament Buildings
Ottawa, ON K1A 0A6
BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS
|