There is definitely a decent case for this argument. The government provides immunity to sellers of a supposedly illegal transaction which causes the buyers to engage in an illegal transaction. It could be said that if the sellers weren't immune, they wouldn't be selling, and therefore the buyer wouldn't be buying. The government would thereby be indirectly encouraging sellers (by providing immunity) to cause buyers to commit an illegal offense which otherwise may not have occurred without government sponsorship.
C-36 today
- Thread starter krazyplayer
- Start date
Putting aside ides the fact that "entrapment" is not a valid defense in Canada...
But along those lines, Can you think of a situation in Canada where someone is permitted to aid and abet another person in the commission of a crime?
I know second reading isn't that big a deal. But here's how the voting went down. Justin Trudeau: no show.
YEAS
Members
Ablonczy
Adams
Adler
Aglukkaq
Albas
Albrecht
Alexander
Allen (Tobique—Mactaquac)
Allison
Ambler
Anderson
Armstrong
Ashfield
Aspin
Baird
Bateman
Benoit
Bergen
Bernier
Bezan
Blaney
Block
Boughen
Braid
Breitkreuz
Brown (Leeds—Grenville)
Brown (Newmarket—Aurora)
Bruinooge
Butt
Calandra
Calkins
Cannan
Carmichael
Chong
Clarke
Clement
Crockatt
Daniel
Davidson
Dechert
Del Mastro
Devolin
Dreeshen
Duncan (Vancouver Island North)
Dykstra
Falk
Fast
Findlay (Delta—Richmond East)
Finley (Haldimand—Norfolk)
Fletcher
Galipeau
Gallant
Gill
Glover
Goguen
Goldring
Goodyear
Gosal
Gourde
Grewal
Harris (Cariboo—Prince George)
Hawn
Hayes
Hiebert
Hillyer
Hoback
Holder
James
Kamp (Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge—Mission)
Keddy (South Shore—St. Margaret's)
Kerr
Komarnicki
Kramp (Prince Edward—Hastings)
Lake
Lauzon
Leef
Lemieux
Leung
Lizon
Lobb
Lukiwski
Lunney
MacKay (Central Nova)
MacKenzie
Maguire
McColeman
McLeod
Menegakis
Moore (Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam)
Moore (Fundy Royal)
Mourani
Nicholson
Norlock
O'Connor
O'Neill Gordon
Opitz
O'Toole
Paradis
Payne
Poilievre
Preston
Rajotte
Reid
Rempel
Richards
Rickford
Saxton
Schellenberger
Seeback
Shea
Shipley
Shory
Smith
Sopuck
Stanton
Strahl
Sweet
Tilson
Toet
Trost
Trottier
Truppe
Valcourt
Van Kesteren
Van Loan
Vellacott
Wallace
Warawa
Warkentin
Watson
Weston (West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country)
Weston (Saint John)
Wilks
Wong
Woodworth
Yelich
Young (Oakville)
Young (Vancouver South)
Zimmer
Total: -- 139
NAYS
Members
Allen (Welland)
Andrews
Angus
Ashton
Atamanenko
Aubin
Bélanger
Bennett
Benskin
Blanchette
Blanchette-Lamothe
Boivin
Borg
Boulerice
Boutin-Sweet
Brahmi
Brosseau
Caron
Casey
Cash
Chicoine
Chisholm
Choquette
Christopherson
Cleary
Comartin
Côté
Crowder
Cullen
Davies (Vancouver Kingsway)
Day
Dewar
Dion
Dionne Labelle
Doré Lefebvre
Dubé
Dubourg
Duncan (Etobicoke North)
Duncan (Edmonton—Strathcona)
Dusseault
Easter
Eyking
Freeland
Freeman
Garneau
Garrison
Genest
Genest-Jourdain
Giguère
Godin
Goodale
Gravelle
Groguhé
Harris (Scarborough Southwest)
Harris (St. John's East)
Hassainia
Hsu
Hughes
Hyer
Jacob
Jones
Julian
Kellway
Lamoureux
Lapointe
Larose
Latendresse
Laverdière
LeBlanc (Beauséjour)
LeBlanc (LaSalle—Émard)
Leslie
Liu
MacAulay
Mai
Marston
Martin
Masse
Mathyssen
May
McCallum
McGuinty
McKay (Scarborough—Guildwood)
Michaud
Morin (Chicoutimi—Le Fjord)
Morin (Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine)
Morin (Laurentides—Labelle)
Morin (Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot)
Mulcair
Murray
Nantel
Nash
Nicholls
Nunez-Melo
Pacetti
Papillon
Pilon
Quach
Rafferty
Rankin
Ravignat
Raynault
Regan
Rousseau
Saganash
Sandhu
Scarpaleggia
Scott
Sellah
Sgro
Simms (Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor)
Sims (Newton—North Delta)
Sitsabaiesan
Sullivan
Thibeault
Tremblay
Turmel
Valeriote
Total: -- 117
YEAS
Members
Ablonczy
Adams
Adler
Aglukkaq
Albas
Albrecht
Alexander
Allen (Tobique—Mactaquac)
Allison
Ambler
Anderson
Armstrong
Ashfield
Aspin
Baird
Bateman
Benoit
Bergen
Bernier
Bezan
Blaney
Block
Boughen
Braid
Breitkreuz
Brown (Leeds—Grenville)
Brown (Newmarket—Aurora)
Bruinooge
Butt
Calandra
Calkins
Cannan
Carmichael
Chong
Clarke
Clement
Crockatt
Daniel
Davidson
Dechert
Del Mastro
Devolin
Dreeshen
Duncan (Vancouver Island North)
Dykstra
Falk
Fast
Findlay (Delta—Richmond East)
Finley (Haldimand—Norfolk)
Fletcher
Galipeau
Gallant
Gill
Glover
Goguen
Goldring
Goodyear
Gosal
Gourde
Grewal
Harris (Cariboo—Prince George)
Hawn
Hayes
Hiebert
Hillyer
Hoback
Holder
James
Kamp (Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge—Mission)
Keddy (South Shore—St. Margaret's)
Kerr
Komarnicki
Kramp (Prince Edward—Hastings)
Lake
Lauzon
Leef
Lemieux
Leung
Lizon
Lobb
Lukiwski
Lunney
MacKay (Central Nova)
MacKenzie
Maguire
McColeman
McLeod
Menegakis
Moore (Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam)
Moore (Fundy Royal)
Mourani
Nicholson
Norlock
O'Connor
O'Neill Gordon
Opitz
O'Toole
Paradis
Payne
Poilievre
Preston
Rajotte
Reid
Rempel
Richards
Rickford
Saxton
Schellenberger
Seeback
Shea
Shipley
Shory
Smith
Sopuck
Stanton
Strahl
Sweet
Tilson
Toet
Trost
Trottier
Truppe
Valcourt
Van Kesteren
Van Loan
Vellacott
Wallace
Warawa
Warkentin
Watson
Weston (West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country)
Weston (Saint John)
Wilks
Wong
Woodworth
Yelich
Young (Oakville)
Young (Vancouver South)
Zimmer
Total: -- 139
NAYS
Members
Allen (Welland)
Andrews
Angus
Ashton
Atamanenko
Aubin
Bélanger
Bennett
Benskin
Blanchette
Blanchette-Lamothe
Boivin
Borg
Boulerice
Boutin-Sweet
Brahmi
Brosseau
Caron
Casey
Cash
Chicoine
Chisholm
Choquette
Christopherson
Cleary
Comartin
Côté
Crowder
Cullen
Davies (Vancouver Kingsway)
Day
Dewar
Dion
Dionne Labelle
Doré Lefebvre
Dubé
Dubourg
Duncan (Etobicoke North)
Duncan (Edmonton—Strathcona)
Dusseault
Easter
Eyking
Freeland
Freeman
Garneau
Garrison
Genest
Genest-Jourdain
Giguère
Godin
Goodale
Gravelle
Groguhé
Harris (Scarborough Southwest)
Harris (St. John's East)
Hassainia
Hsu
Hughes
Hyer
Jacob
Jones
Julian
Kellway
Lamoureux
Lapointe
Larose
Latendresse
Laverdière
LeBlanc (Beauséjour)
LeBlanc (LaSalle—Émard)
Leslie
Liu
MacAulay
Mai
Marston
Martin
Masse
Mathyssen
May
McCallum
McGuinty
McKay (Scarborough—Guildwood)
Michaud
Morin (Chicoutimi—Le Fjord)
Morin (Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine)
Morin (Laurentides—Labelle)
Morin (Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot)
Mulcair
Murray
Nantel
Nash
Nicholls
Nunez-Melo
Pacetti
Papillon
Pilon
Quach
Rafferty
Rankin
Ravignat
Raynault
Regan
Rousseau
Saganash
Sandhu
Scarpaleggia
Scott
Sellah
Sgro
Simms (Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor)
Sims (Newton—North Delta)
Sitsabaiesan
Sullivan
Thibeault
Tremblay
Turmel
Valeriote
Total: -- 117
In the Toronto area on Thursday for those with the guts to go:
The prostitution abolitionist crew posing as educators are having a public talk on C36.
Jun 19 at 7:00pm
4600 Dundas Street West, Toronto
MP Joy Smith, John Cassells (SIM) & Jasmine (Sextrade 101) Explain the potential impact of new prostitution legislation on Toronto and communities across Canada.
Bring your questions and comments.
MP Bernard Trottier will be moderating the discussion.
Open to the public.
The prostitution abolitionist crew posing as educators are having a public talk on C36.
Jun 19 at 7:00pm
4600 Dundas Street West, Toronto
MP Joy Smith, John Cassells (SIM) & Jasmine (Sextrade 101) Explain the potential impact of new prostitution legislation on Toronto and communities across Canada.
Bring your questions and comments.
MP Bernard Trottier will be moderating the discussion.
Open to the public.
any SPs here will go to this anti-sex event and ask them why are they ignoring sexworkers who don't buy into the victim narrative?
I think if there are messages to be sent it is best to focus on the fact the bill is UNCONSTITUTIONAL and press for referral to the SCOC to avoid an expensive and costly process. It is highly irresponsible for MPs and the parliament to ignore the SCOC regardless of what they personally feel about sex work. IMHO this bill is a done deal but any chance to of successfully defeating it will be on constitutional grounds.
I think they already know the bill is unconstitutional. I think the conservatives regard the supreme court as the enemy.
This is just an election ploy for the 2015 federal election.
As a member of the public we all need to be concerned about a slippery slope law wherein we can be criminalized for the purchase of a service that is legal to offer.
It's illegal and discriminatory against both buyers and sellers.
Sellers are infantalized by the big brother government who knows better than they do.
Also SP's see a disproportionate number of vulnerable clients (often old and disabled) who could get a record without ever leaving their own homes. This is just wrong on so many levels.
This is just an election ploy for the 2015 federal election.
As a member of the public we all need to be concerned about a slippery slope law wherein we can be criminalized for the purchase of a service that is legal to offer.
It's illegal and discriminatory against both buyers and sellers.
Sellers are infantalized by the big brother government who knows better than they do.
Also SP's see a disproportionate number of vulnerable clients (often old and disabled) who could get a record without ever leaving their own homes. This is just wrong on so many levels.
This is the biggest issue I have with this bill.
If prostitutes are allowed to place advertisements (not in public apparently, so a private ad only available to those over 18 is apparently legal), a person reading the ad, should be entitled to purchase the services being advertised. A person who responds to a legal advertisement should not be criminalized for acting in good faith. If it is illegal to purchase the services advertised in an advertisement, the advertisement should not be allowed either. Aren't you simply creating more problems by allowing the advertising to begin with?
What happens if a person buys stolen property? The seller is the criminal. The seller is selling something he/she has no legal title to sell. The buyer, acting in good faith, is not criminally liable for receiving stolen property, unless the buyer knew, or should have known, that the goods were stolen. I think the laws for purchasing prostitution should work in the same way. That's the way it works in the UK.
Did you read the link?
That says that you might be able to get a stay of proceedings AFTER the court finds you guilty of an offence.
Sorry for my ignorance but is it 50% that gets the bill passed, or is some higher percentage of yes votes required? 139 to 117 seems like such a marginal difference.
For advertising, the girl can advertise, but another party cant be involved. Maybe a girl can pass out cards and talk to people in areas where there are no kids. If the cops do find and ad and track it back to the source and it was the girl that posted it, she would not be charged. Correct me if I'm wrong, but that is the way I read it.
http://news.gc.ca/web/article-en.do?nid=853729
"Advertising the sale of sexual services - This new offence would prohibit advertising the sale of others' sexual services in print media or on the Internet. It would give courts the power to authorize the seizure of materials containing such advertisements, to order an advertisement to be removed from the Internet, and to require the provision of information that would identify and locate the person who posted it. Maximum penalties for advertising the sale of sexual services would be 18 months imprisonment on summary conviction and 5 years imprisonment on indictment."
I know it's kind of sad but unfortunately that is how democracy works. 51% of the people can vote away the rights of the other 49%. We can only hope that the supreme court can protect the minority.
Pope Shakey @PopeShakey 3h
More
.@pmlagasse @EmmMacfarlane If a government passes an unconstitutional law (say, #s4 #c13 or #c36) can the GG withhold Royal Assent?
More
.@pmlagasse @EmmMacfarlane If a government passes an unconstitutional law (say, #s4 #c13 or #c36) can the GG withhold Royal Assent?
Possible, but not probable, except in Emergency situations, which this is not. Not aware of anytime in the UK or Canada where this has happened federally.
Interesting tactic though!
But, it's not obvious on its face that C36 is unconstitutional. Plus, the GG is a ceremonial role. Even if it were the Queen herself, imagine the shitstorm if she meddled directly in the business of a duly elected government.
But, it's not obvious on its face that C36 is unconstitutional. Plus, the GG is a ceremonial role. Even if it were the Queen herself, imagine the shitstorm if she meddled directly in the business of a duly elected government.
Only a court of law can proclaim a law unconstitutional. It cannot become law until GG assents.
SCC can directly consider a bill, but only if it is sent there by the GG, who would only do so if Cabinet told him to.
If that happened, we would have a Constitutional crisis and would probably need to dump some tea into the Atlantic.
