Expect lively debate over prostitution and pot use

The stage has been set for some interesting debate in 2014 around two subjects that heretofore were ignored by Canada’s ruling class.

However, while the opportunity now exists to craft smarter policy with regard to prostitution and marijuana, it is far from certain as to whether that will happen. Nonetheless, a robust conversation on both fronts is both long overdue and now unavoidable.

The Supreme Court of Canada has helped ensure that. Earlier this month, the court unanimously struck down our prostitution laws, and gave Parliament one year to craft new legislation.

Contrary to what some have claimed, the Supreme Court did not legalize prostitution. As the ruling states: “It is not a crime in Canada to sell sex for money.”

Rather, what the court did was recognize that three laws specifically — the ban on public communication for the purpose of solicitation, the ban on living off the avails of prostitution, and the prohibition of bawdy houses — make an already dangerous profession that much more dangerous.

Given that prostitution itself is legal, these create a muddled and contradictory legal mess. And if that status quo is endangering the lives of women — which the evidence clearly shows it is — then the laws become untenable and indefensible.

Yet, were it not for this court challenge, those laws would remain in place. So while opponents of legal or regulated prostitution are now proposing other means by which to address the matter, we ought to ask why so many were so content with such flawed and dangerous legislation.

Following the Supreme Court’s ruling, Justice Minister Peter MacKay issued a statement which made clear the government’s intent to “ensure the criminal law continues to address the significant harms that flow from prostitution to communities, those engaged in prostitution, and vulnerable persons.”

There are indications that the government is considering the so-called Nordic model, which criminalizes the supply side of prostitution. However, it seems likely that a punish-the-johns approach will raise many of the same issues that the Supreme Court just dealt with. Moreover, it’s not clear that this approach is as effective as supporters claim.

A study last year from Norway’s official help centre for prostitutes found that two years after that country brought in its law to focus on buyers, the number of prostitutes working on the streets and behind closed doors had actually increased. A separate study last year by Norwegian researchers found that the law had made prostitutes more reliant on pimps and had also encouraged human trafficking.

It seems the push for a Nordicstyle law is not borne of evidence, but rather a belief that prostitution is immoral and wrong, and from that, a desire for government to do whatever it can to restrict it.

It’s a tone we’ve seen from politicians here in Alberta. During last year’s election, the Tories excoriated Wildrose Leader Danielle Smith over past columns decrying the status quo, and Premier Alison Redford urged Ottawa to “continue Canada’s strong opposition to legalized prostitution.”

If left to politicians like Redford, our prostitution laws and our drug laws would remain unchanged.

This past year saw marijuana legalization become a reality in other jurisdictions and saw increasing numbers of Canadians recognize the futility of our own laws. To their credit, many politicians and other organizations have picked up the mantle of legalization or decriminalization. Redford, however, remains vehemently opposed to any softening of Canada’s status quo.

But change may be coming. MacKay has recently mused about allowing police to issue tickets as opposed to laying criminal charges for possession. However, it’s unclear if that would reduce the number of criminal charges laid, or merely expand the number of people punished.

The year 2014 will bring us a debate on these fronts, and will likely result in some changes. It remains to be seen, however, whether it will be change for the better.