Skip to main content
EVIDENCE

[Recorded by Electronic Apparatus]

Thursday, November 21, 1996

.1539

[English]

The Chair: We will now move from motor vehicle safety to Bill C-27.

We have with us, from the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police, Chief Julian Fantino of the London Police Service and Fred Schultz, executive director.

Welcome. I understand you have some remarks and then we'll have some questions.

.1540

Chief Julian Fantino (London Police Service; Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police): Thank you, Madam Chair.

Mr. Fred Schultz (Executive Director, Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police): Madam Chair, my name is Fred Schultz, and on behalf of the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police, I would once again like to thank the committee for the opportunity to appear before you in this particular context of Bill C-27.

I think most of you are aware that our association represents the management level of policing services across Canada. Through our members, we represent approximately 90% of the police officers in the country.

With me today is Chief Fantino, who is a member of our law amendments committee. He took on the task of reviewing the bill and preparing some comments for us. We provided a brief for you, unfortunately at the last minute, due to the time constraints. However, I would like to ask Chief Fantino now to go over that for you, and we'll respond to any questions.

Chief Fantino: Thank you.

Madam Chair and members, I'm grateful for the opportunity to represent our members and appear before you on Bill C-27, which is basically a very good bill. However, we are asking, can we do more?

My presentation will address two areas of Bill C-27. The first is the issue of sexual exploitation of children. The second is the change in the legislation on criminal harassment, otherwise known as stalking.

With respect to child prostitution, Bill C-27 would amend subsection 212(4) of the Criminal Code to make it an offence for an individual who is a Canadian citizen or permanent resident to obtain or attempt to obtain the sexual services outside of Canada of a person under the age of 18 years. This step has been taken by Parliament in an attempt to address the problem of Canadian citizens who travel abroad on so-called sex tours in third world countries, and as a result, pay for sex with children.

According to London member of Parliament Sue Barnes, who recently spoke at the Inter-Parliamentary Union Conference in Beijing, child sex tourism, often advertised on Internet sites, also involves men in the London area.

Can anyone dispute that this is an admirable objective? Absolutely not. The question, however, is whether or not the federal government will follow through on this legislation by providing the funding that will be necessary to pursue such charges.

As was pointed out by Winnipeg lawyer Sheldon Pinx on behalf of the Canadian Bar Association, as reported in The Toronto Star on November 6, 1996:

Therefore, let us not fall into the trap of complacency. Do not assume that making this legislation the law of the land will solve the problem. Laws are nothing more than words on paper without the financial resources and the will to enforce them.

And what is the state of the nation as far as our own children are concerned? Is there a problem with victimization in our own backyard? Tragically, the answer is an unqualified yes. Children are being hunted and recruited for sexual gratification by adult predators from coast to coast, from small towns to big cities, via the Internet and many other means.

Maclean's magazine reported on November 18, 1996 on the arrest of an individual in Kirkland Lake who was charged with possessing, importing and distributing child pornography, and it is alleged that he was part of a ring that was uncovered initially by U.S. federal agents. The investigation was continued and the arrest made in Ontario by members of Project P, who are dedicated to dealing with issues of child pornography, pornography generally and sexual exploitation issues.

According to Jim Carroll, co-author of the Canadian Internet Handbook:

.1545

There are an estimated 40 million to 50 million Internet members, and as we know already, a certain number of them are criminals who are on the net and use the net to prey on children.

Canada has a long-established reputation as a world leader in the fight for human rights. Do we not need to supplement new and improved laws with a renewed focus on hitting the causes of crime before people are involved in such activities? The National Crime Prevention Council of Canada, at a recent conference in Montreal, concluded that money spent on early childhood education and programs dealing with family violence is a better investment than cash used to hire police and build prisons.

Chairman Ross Hastings stated:

How do our stated objectives of child protection and nurturing accord with reality? In October 1995 the Federal-Provincial Working Group on Prostitution released its interim report, which states at page 3:

What has been the general response to this situation? We would suggest that the public has been largely apathetic, or perhaps in denial. Worse, the predators have gone on the offensive. Recently, one of their advocates, Gerald Hannon, a self-admitted male prostitute and long-time proponent of inter-generational sex, was invited to speak to a gathering of University of Western Ontario journalism students.

We have a zero tolerance policy throughout this country for advocating violence against women. Should the same standard not apply to children? According to the University of Western Ontario student newspaper, the Gazette, this individual had the gall to publicly state:

What the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police is suggesting is that as good as the intentions of Bill C-27 are, this legislation may be overly ambitious in attempting to reach beyond our borders, while the rot within continues to fester. Bill C-27 addresses in part concerns that were raised at SafetyNet, a National Conference on Crime Prevention, Public Safety and Justice Reform at a conference held September 18 to 20, 1994, in Hamilton, Ontario. This conference recommended legislation targeting the child sex trade, but recommendation 7 of the report from that conference was the creation of a national child abuse registry. The onus would be upon a perspective employee who hopes to work in a position of trust with children to produce an updated recent certificate from the registry to prove that he or she has no previous convictions for sexual offences against children.

This very issue has resurfaced of late as school boards, responding to budget cuts, have been forced to rely increasingly on volunteers to assist in the classroom. In a Globe and Mail article on September 10, 1996, education reporter Virginia Galt reported that the new president of the Canadian School Boards Association stated:

.1550

As was said at the closing plenary session of the World Congress Against the Commercial Sexual Exploitation of Children in Stockholm, Sweden, in August of this year:

Therefore we would suggest that political will and money are the two key components in making the extraterritorial aspects of Bill C-27 work, as well as in addressing the domestic problem of child sexual abuse within Canada.

There is a further deficiency in the bill, however, and that is the wording of subclause 2(3), which amends section 212 of the Criminal Code. This creates subsection (2.1), which makes it an indictable offence to live on the avails of prostitution of another person under the age of 18 years, but only where the accused ``uses, threatens to use or attempts to use violence, intimidation or coercion in relation to the person under that age''.

Why is it necessary to include this qualifier? Surely the sexual exploitation of children should be a prima facie offence, with or without the component of violence. Remember that when we are dealing with such situations there is an inherent imbalance of power in favour of the pimp, keeping in mind that economic desperation often drives the victim into prostitution and that pedophiles have no end of rationalizations for their behaviour.

In an article published in the Orange County Register on May 5, 1996, entitled ``Asian Brothels Victimize Kids'', reference is made to Dr. Gavin Scott, a British national who has lived in Cambodia since 1992, practising medicine, and who served five months in a Phnom Penh prison on rape charges after paying five teen-age boys to have sex with him.

What does Scott say about his sordid behaviour?

Therefore, we must recognize that the very fact of child sexual abuse is a violation of human rights, with or without overt physical violence. We would urge the government to delete proposed paragraph (b), which makes violence a necessary component of this offence. We would further urge the government to consider deleting any reference to consideration in cases of child sexual exploitation.

The division between commercial and non-commercial exploitation is artificial, since many kids are abused long before they start selling sex. Child prostitution does not arise out of a vacuum. Children do not willingly sell their bodies. They are driven to it by economic factors, sometimes combined with sexual abuse early in their lives, which has had the effect of desensitizing them to these activities with older individuals.

With respect to stalking legislation, clause 3 of Bill C-27 would amend section 231 of the Criminal Code by adding subsection (6), which defines murder caused during the commission or attempted commission of an offence under section 264 as first degree, where the person committing the offence intended to cause the person murdered to fear for his or her safety or the safety of anyone known to the person murdered.

The Canadian Bar Association does not support this aspect of the legislation. With all due respect to the Canadian Bar Association, the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police strongly support this measure. We would suggest that even if this in some sense impinges upon the charter rights of the accused, the rights of the victim make this measure demonstrably justifiable within a free and democratic society, in the words of section 1 of the charter.

.1555

To sum up, our ultimate goal should be worldwide eradication of sexual exploitation of children, whether they are lured or physically forced into these tragic situations, and whether they are abused in Phnom Penh or in Ottawa. We urge the government to remove the caveats that a commercial component and physical violence is necessary to prove that a criminal offence has been committed regardless of consideration.

We further urge the government to establish a national intelligence information gathering, analysis, and threat assessment entity to monitor the activities and movements of known and suspected pedophiles, to be used as a centre point for screening all persons seeking or otherwise holding positions of trust and responsibility over children.

Finally, within the context of Bill C-27, we would urge the federal government to define 18 years and over as the age of consent for sexual encounters with adults. There should be no excuse for sexual contact by adults with anyone less than this age. Effective extraterritorial laws and procedures ought to be established to prosecute ``in loco'' tourists and visitors who sexually exploit and abuse the children of the world. Extradition should be easily facilitated where circumstances dictate.

Children are our most precious national resource. We claim to hold them in high esteem, to want to nurture and protect them. We must be prepared to expand the resources to carry out our promises and moral obligations to do so.

Madam Chair and members, we have added for your quick reference a number of recommendations that flow from our presentation:

- That sufficient monetary resources be made available to enforce the provisions of Bill C-27;

- That there be a creation of a national child abuse registry;

- That proposed paragraph 212(2.1)(b), which states ``uses, threatens to use or attempts to use violence, intimidation or coercion in relation to the person under that age'', be deleted;

- That the federal government include the extraterritorial sexual exploitation or abuse of a person under 18 years by a Canadian citizen or a permanent resident of Canada as an offence against the relevant sections of the Criminal Code regardless of consideration;

- That the federal government establish a national intelligence information-gathering entity to monitor the activities and movements of pedophiles;

- That the federal government define 18 years and over as they age of consent for sexual encounters with adults. There should be no excuse for sexual contacts by adults with persons under this age;

- That the effective extraterritorial laws and procedures be established to prosecute ``in loco'' tourists/visitors who sexually exploit and abuse children anywhere in the world - extradition procedures should be facilitated;

- Finally, that there be greater funding for early childhood education and programs dealing with family violence.

Overall, Madam Chair and members, we applaud the efforts of the government in terms of addressing these issues through Bill C-27. Our intent has been to encourage government to go one step further and to look at the situation in our own country, which does require some serious attention.

The Chair: Thank you very much.

Before we start questions, I want to clarify one thing. Subsection 212.(2) of the Criminal Code does make it an offence, under any circumstances, to live off the avails of prostitution with a person who is under the age of 18 years. On the amendment, when we add violence to it, we're giving a minimum of five years.

I'm sure the brief is unintentionally misleading in that sense. There already is a section in the code that makes it an illegal and indictable offence punishable by a maximum of 14 years in prison for living off the avails of prostitution with a young person.

.1600

As well, I want to point out - and you may wish to comment on this later - that it's my understanding that CPIC is already used. There's an enhanced version or program of CPIC to maintain a registry of sorts of child abusers, which is also accessible, through police departments, to agencies that deal with children.

You may wish to comment on that, Chief, or somebody may wish to ask you about it. Outside the legislative framework, I understand some attempts have been made by the federal government in that regard. As I say, I'm not asking questions, I just want colleagues to know. They may want to ask questions based on that.

Mr. Ramsay, ten minutes.

Mr. Ramsay (Crowfoot): Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you very much for your presentation. I agree with your conclusion that the child sex tourism legislation contained within this bill is going to be very difficult, if not impossible, to enforce. The fact is, we're not able to properly enforce the laws here.

I have a copy of The Ottawa Citizen dated May 6, 1996, in which Kimberly Daum is very critical of the direction the justice minister has taken. She says, for instance:

The point she's making is that they're going after the pimps rather than the johns. Although the law exists there to charge the johns, she points out that during that period of time, only eight johns were charged.

How do you gentlemen feel about that? Do you feel, as Kimberly Daum points out, we should be going after the source of the problem, which is those who are prepared and willing to buy sex from these teenaged prostitutes?

Chief Fantino: I believe Bill C-27 is attempting to do that in many different respects. Certainly, we already have offences, as the chair stated, that relate to obtaining the sexual services of minors, and on it goes. We have situations where communicating for the purposes of prostitution generally is also available to us.

The reality is, Bill C-27 is in one respect focusing on the international trafficking and sexual exploitation of children. It also addresses the penalty section, aggravating the penalty to a minimum of five years, if you will, where there's violence involved with a minor.

I think the bill is heading in the right direction, but we need to do an awful lot more. This is a very covert type of offence in many cases. Kids are being preyed upon. They're being pursued actively all over the world, in our own country. We're saying Bill C-27 is a good start but we need to do more.

Moreover, we have some difficulty appreciating there should be a difference in the value component of the offence, the trauma, the consequences, on the basis of there being some compensation. Sexual abuse is sexual abuse, whether it's done by a parent, a friend, a teacher or some stranger anywhere in this world, whether or not there's payment or compensation involved.

Mr. Ramsay: Do you feel this bill will assist the police in laying charges against those who use juvenile prostitutes?

Chief Fantino: Mr. Ramsay, the bill would assist. All new pieces of legislation, if we have the resources in place and the will to enforce them, help, obviously. We're saying we support Bill C-27 with the added recommendations we've offered and the observations you've heard in my presentation. I can't discredit Bill C-27, because it is of some help, but it requires other things to happen in order for even its limited purpose to be accomplished.

.1605

Mr. Ramsay: Of course, I'm not speaking about discrediting Bill C-27, because our caucus will support this bill.

The point I'm asking you to address is it seems very strange that we do have laws on the books now that deal with those who would solicit the use of child prostitution - juvenile prostitutes - and in B.C. during this period of time there were only eight men charged. Is there a problem with the law as it exists now, and will the contents of Bill C-27 address that problem, if you recognize there is a problem?

Chief Fantino: I don't know the specifics with regard to the B.C. case, but I can tell you through personal involvement that we have been very aggressive in pursuing adults who are preying on children, who are sexually exploiting them, in Ontario for instance. I can speak to that directly.

I don't know about this particular situation you refer to, but I can tell you that we, in the law enforcement community, are vigorously addressing these issues of victimization of children as a vulnerable group that deserves a lot more attention, care and concern from us as a society.

I have to go back to this incident at the University of Western Ontario, when we had an individual appear there and speak about the benefits and the issues in advocating that sexual relations between adults and minors are not necessarily an abuse of power on the part of the adult and that 10-year-olds are aggressors. We are talking about a situation where the lambs are chasing the wolves, yet there's no outrage anywhere.

So I think, Mr. Ramsay, that we as a country have yet to recognize how severe this problem is; we have yet to come to grips with it and approach it from the point of view of the ruination of the lives of children, depriving them of their childhood. Whether it's in the home by parents, in the school system, wherever, it should be taboo to speak about preying upon children.

Children should be protected. There should not be an opportunity for proponents of pedophilia or those who promote the benefits of adult-child sex. There should be no room in this country for any kind of a forum for those folks.

None of us could go around this country and speak publicly anywhere about the benefits of wife abuse or woman abuse and get away with it, and yet we allow it for children.

So we are not focused. We still have our heads in the sand. We heard it quite well in Stockholm, where 1,300 people in attendance there, including our minister, Lloyd Axworthy, and other people, heard about how serious this problem is. But we don't have to go to Sweden; we can go to London, Ontario, or Ottawa, or anywhere else.

Mr. Ramsay: I think the point this writer is making is why are there not more people who are abusing our children through the use of child prostitutes being brought into court?

I agree with your conclusion on pages 6 and 7, where you state that you urge the government to delete paragraph (b), which makes violence a necessary component of this particular offence. I don't think we should be concerned about just that area of forcing children into prostitution by threats of intimidation or violence or whatever. That should be a very serious matter, but bringing children into prostitution with milk and honey should be just as serious a matter.

You oppose the Canadian Bar Association with regard to the clause 3 amendment to section 231 of the Criminal Code, but this does in fact create a new definition of murder, does it not? I find this a bit surprising. Could you broaden your rationale for it?

Chief Fantino: There is a new component, a new ingredient, yes, on first degree murder.

Mr. Ramsay: Would you not agree that it creates a new definition as well?

Chief Fantino: Obviously, by the mere fact that it's altered, yes.

Mr. Ramsay: And you find there are no warning lights going off in your mind over that?

.1610

Chief Fantino: The Canadian Bar Association is not in favour of this added measure of protection, if you will; we, the Canadian chiefs, are. We want it in there.

Mr. Ramsay: It removes the quality of mens rea, and you have no concern about that?

Chief Fantino: Mens rea can be established, Mr. Ramsay, through a whole series of events and situations that go to the intent that a person...it could be constructive intent.

Mr. Ramsay: I'll come back to it, Madam Chair. My time is up.

The Chair: Thanks.

Mr. Maloney.

Mr. Maloney (Erie): Perhaps I could just look for clarification of your comments, Madam Chair, with respect to the special category of CPIC searches as opposed to the national child abuse registry.

The Chair: Thanks.

Mr. Maloney: Could someone clarify this for me?

Chief Fantino: Madam Chair, if I may, we have presently, of course, through CPIC, which is a national crime computer, access to all kinds of data that relate to criminal activities and convictions and so forth. We're talking about a registry for pedophiles, not necessarily those who are convicted, or, for instance, out on parole, but those who are believed to be dangerous. We're looking for a situation where the international world traveller pedophile type, be he convicted or not, go on a data bank where we can then track their movements.

Mr. Maloney: Is there a difference between your first recommendation on page 9 and your fourth recommendation on page 9, or are they one and the same?

Chief Fantino: No. What we presently have is some access to data on the basis of criminal convictions that are established. We're looking for a registry that also includes suspected pedophiles and their movements.

Mr. Maloney: Whether they've been convicted or not.

Chief Fantino: That's correct.

Mr. Kirkby (Prince Albert - Churchill River): Wouldn't they be searched?

Chief Fantino: Yes.

The Chair: I don't mean to interrupt in terms of your time - I don't do that normally - but it's important, I think, to make sure that we have our terms straight, because I have some knowledge from my old life in terms of this stuff.

There exists in the province of Ontario, and I think in all provinces, a child abuse registry, which includes people who have never been convicted, and the police have access to that. I don't think it's fair, Chief...and I know you're not doing it on purpose, but I think we need to get the information out there in terms of my colleagues here, Mr. Ramsay and Mr. Leblanc. It's important for us to know what the facts are, and the facts are that in Ontario, through the Ministry of Community and Social Services, for instance, there is a child abuse registry and you have access to it.

Chief Fantino: Yes, we do. We're talking in reference to Bill C-27 specifically. We're talking about a more international kind of scope. For instance, right now we're investigating people who are here for Interpol. We're asking them to investigate people who are elsewhere. We're focused on Bill C-27, Madam Chair.

The Chair: It just leaves an impression that there's no information out there, and there is.

Chief Fantino: There is, yes.

The Chair: Sorry, Mr. Maloney, carry on.

Mr. Maloney: Do other jurisdictions have this international registry, such as the United States, Britain and other countries - Interpol, etc.?

Chief Fantino: There is not as yet. There's some structure being contemplated within the Interpol community to put something of this nature in place.

Mr. Maloney: Thank you, Madam Chair.

The Chair: Mr. Collins.

Mr. Collins (Souris - Moose Mountain): Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

Chief, on page 3 there's a comment that you have submitted in a book. I would like you to tell me what your thoughts are on it. It has to do with the statement by the National Crime Prevention Council:

What's your reaction to that?

Chief Fantino: It's quite simply an opportunity for us to prevent so many of these situations from ending up in the criminal courts or with children being victimized. If we do a good job of prevention in all of these support areas, supporting family, supporting our young people and protecting them from being preyed upon and all of that, I would suspect we can then look to better end results.

.1615

The studies we've looked at seem to conclude time and time again that the cycle of violence, for instance, repeats itself whether it's seen or experienced even in the home. Children are vulnerable. They're obviously easy prey, and if we can find better ways of protecting them and helping them through those very formative, very vulnerable years, I would suspect, as seems to be indicated by all those who have researched the issue, that we can then attain far greater results than by just managing the problem as we have.

Mr. Collins: Do you concur with the statement that family support, parent training, and early intervention programs reduce child abuse by up to 50%?

Chief Fantino: That's a figure I quoted, which was reported. Yes, whether it's 50% or 45%, I believe we can do it substantially.

Mr. Collins: It's fairly significant, though.

Chief Fantino: I believe so, yes, indeed.

Mr. Collins: In your summary, where you listed recommendations, I found it interesting that the last recommendation was the one that seemed to have a very significant import to it. I wonder if you would want that to be placed somewhere else in the level of interest and importance so that we deal with it...

Chief Fantino: I would give it a very significant importance. From the point of view of even the practice, if you will, we dedicate a lot of resources even in law enforcement, in crime prevention, and in programs that go to preventing situations where we then have to deal with them. These are proactive kinds of initiatives and programs, and they do work. The difficulty we have is until that cycle becomes one where we can attain the desired benefits, we still have to have a balance of enforcement and suppression - and on it goes, certainly.

Mr. Collins: Finally, do you feel that about 95% of policing is good public relations or that a high percentage of it is related to good public relations?

Chief Fantino: I suppose everything we do, sir, should be tied into good public relations. The things we do should be those things that benefit the community, that are needed by the community, and that profit the community. Our primary mandate is safety and security issues, but I always like to add ``quality of life''. I think it's so significant in terms of preventing things from happening. That's one of the reasons why police organizations everywhere, as a matter of philosophy, have adopted concepts along the lines of community-based policing, which is problem solving; it's working with the community, making partnerships with all of the sectors to deal with those causes of crime we don't have to deal with if we do a good job on the front end.

Might I also add, sir, that we involve ourselves with a lot of programs with children, and we see a tremendous response from the children when a positive environment is created for them and opportunities given to them - good mentoring, all of that. We're really sold on this business that we as a society can do an awful lot more, but it can't be left to the police, it can't be left to the justice system, and it can't be left to education.

Mr. Collins: With regard to that, having taught for 32 years, one of the things I find amazing, and I think you really hit on it in the paper you presented, is that we didn't spend... I was the chairman of the board of police commissioners. I had a hell of a time convincing our folks on the policing side that there was really an important segment where we had to have an interaction with the department and the schools. I think it was both sides of the coin, because from an educational standpoint, now that we've identified the issues - and you certainly have identified them - I don't think we can waste too much time in getting on with getting to the crux of the situation.

How can we, on a national level, ensure that teachers are part of this component that is working in the interests of students and not becoming a part of the problem? I really would like to know.

.1620

I commend you. I think it's an excellent submission.

I'm not on this committee - I'm just filling in today - but I sure would like to know how we, the government, assist you, so that the end result is that all youngsters, whether urban or rural or whatever, have some assurance that we have approached... We train young people to rely on placing...

But parenting - I'll bet you can't tell me, in very many schools across Canada, if we spend much time on parenting. You know we don't. We do everything else, and by God, they go out of grade 12 and the one thing they don't know is how to raise kids.

I'm sorry, I do digress -

The Vice-Chair (Ms Torsney): I've already taken the corner on the parenting market. You can't pick up on my theme.

Mr. Collins: Sorry. I would just like to know, Chief...

The Vice-Chair (Ms Torsney): I was just teasing you.

Chief Fantino: All of these comments are so valid. I can speak for all of my colleagues. We just cry out for the opportunity to be able to do more as a community. If we can cement this unified forward thrust... I keep saying to folks time and time again, I would just like to call a halt to proceedings for one year, stop spending on the glitz and the glory and whatever and just focus on probably what is the most vulnerable and the most precious resource that our country and our world has: the children. Throw everything we have at the children, for one whole year.

I'd like to measure that outcome. I believe we can do a whole lot better. I make no apologies, nor can I make any excuses, for the police community. I think we have legislated responsibilities that are primary. We would like to do more what people interpret to be ``soft'' programs.

A lot of our folks are totally committed to working with vulnerable groups in our communities - the elderly, the seniors, certainly the women and children - trying to problem solve. But the moment the budget is hacked and slashed, those are considered soft programs, and they're the first to go. That's regrettable.

Mr. Collins: I agree. Thanks very much.

The Vice-Chair (Ms Torsney): Thank you, Mr. Collins.

I'll continue the list.

[Translation]

Mr. Leblanc, ten minutes, please.

Mr. Leblanc (Longueuil): There were some lengthy discussions in the past whether prostitution should be criminalised or legalised. In several countries, we know that prostitution is legalised rather than being criminalised. We also know that if prostitution is criminalised, it will be taken in charge by criminals whereas if it is legalised, it is becoming an ordinary activity. I am not saying I am against or in favour of one or the other, nut the question has been discussed at lengths. Countries have adopted different positions, different ways of dealing with prostitution.

If prostitution were legalised and accepted for people over the age of 18, if it were criminalised and seriously penalised for people under the age of 18, do you think that such a measure would decrease under-age prostitution?

[English]

Chief Fantino: Your question is one that comes up time and time again. It's a very difficult one for me to answer. All I can tell you is that the Canadian chiefs have taken the position that we are opposed to legalizing prostitution. We feel that the detrimental effects would be significant, certainly.

We also believe that organized crime and other activities would still prevail. We believe it would still be a matter of power and control. Countries that have legalized it have not done well. We can give you horror stories.

Not to moralize on the issue, but for us, legalizing an activity such as this amounts to forgetting that whether we like it or not - and I'm sorry to say that not everyone agrees - prostitution really is the victimization of women; it's the degradation of women, and on it goes.

If some people want to advance that position, we're not in favour of it. We feel it's a cop-out. It means we can't solve the problem, we can't deal with the problem, so we'll legalize it.

.1625

Just as a parallel to that, in Switzerland they sectioned off a part of one of the cities there and made it a place where one can go and do drugs. I spoke with the chief of that community not too long ago. They closed it down because it was a disaster. It was a place for people to destroy themselves and to be destroyed.

But I do agree with you that we have to pay special and particular attention to the exploitation of children - the sexual exploitation of children, the victimization of children. There should be, as Bill C-27 points out, some special consideration in terms of the protection necessary, the penalties and so forth, in that area.

We just don't feel, within the context for instance of Bill C-27, that you need to beat up on a woman or on a child to make it a serious aggravating offence. You don't have to have blood to traumatize people. People traumatize severely without the blood.

I have no answer other than an official answer on our part: we're not in favour of legalizing prostitution, for a lot of reasons.

[Translation]

Mr. Leblanc: Do you think that if prostitution were legalised, under-age prostitution would decrease?

[English]

Chief Fantino: No, sir. With respect, Madam Chair, I don't believe that at all, and I'll tell you why. A lot of the sex tours now, for instance, are aggressively looking to places like third world countries and such, seeking out younger and younger children. We also have organized crime involved in prostitution generally. There will still be ways of making money illegally and using people. We have seen it with the smuggling of alcohol and cigarettes. These activities will still continue, as will the power and control issue. There will still be those folks out there who will be pimping and being in a position of exerting power and control, because there's money to be made, and the rot just continues.

I like to think that we as a sophisticated society are not prepared to give up the ship, if you will, and not address the real issue, which is the victimization of women in the context of prostitution, and the victimization of children under 18. I don't believe that would deter at all. See what happened for instance with the smuggling situation - it's all money; it's all power and control. People become a commodity.

[Translation]

The Vice-Chair (Ms Torsney): Thank you very much, Mr. Leblanc.

There is a very interesting article concerning the man who chooses children. It explains why he prefers children over other adults.

[English]

Mr. DeVillers.

Mr. DeVillers (Simcoe North): Thank you, Madam Chair.

I just noticed, Chief, that two of your recommendations deal with funding. One is that sufficient monetary resources be made available to enforce the provisions of the bill, and the other that there be greater funding for early childhood education and programs dealing with family violence. I notice one is the first recommendation and the other is the last recommendation. Are they prioritized that way, or are they recommendations of equal strength?

Chief Fantino: You're very astute. I would suspect that we would like to have a go at both of those issues. The most immediate would be, I suppose, the earlier one. In the long term, the resources necessary to enforce the proposed changes as per Bill C-27 seems to me to be more immediate, but probably the most beneficial in the long term would be the latter.

Mr. DeVillers: That's my only question.

The Vice-Chair (Ms Torsney): Mr. Grose.

Mr. Grose (Oshawa): Madam Chair, I was to be here to replace Mr. DeVillers, but as he has turned up, I am no longer replacing him, so I've now become a visitor, which means I speak last on this.

.1630

Mr. Kirkby: You go ahead and speak. You're supernumerary. That means you're old.

Mr. Grose: Chief, I know you're not a sociologist; you're a law enforcement officer. But you've been at the sharp end a long time, and there's a point here that bothers me.

We keep punishing people who are convicted of sexual offences, and punishment means whatever period of time. Eventually, they reappear.

From your personal experience, I'm wondering if you feel that punishment has any effect on sexual offences. Should it be treated as a social disease, a mental aberration? Should the person be isolated from society until they no longer can affect the rest of society with whatever it is, be it a disease or whatever their problem? It seems to me we're just operating a revolving door here, and it doesn't solve anything. Is that your feeling as well?

Chief Fantino: I've always held a belief that punishment in and of itself only accomplishes punishment. I've talked to enough criminals in my time. In my experience, for instance, most criminals don't believe they're ever going to be caught. So punishment is a factor only when you're directly affected by punishment, for instance.

However, what we are not doing too well in this country is rehabilitation...the overall importance of protecting the greater good of society and not letting these folks out and about who are known to be dangerous. There ought to be some other mechanism. There is some proposed legislation to deal with long-term monitoring and other activities that will address this issue.

To get directly to your question, if all there is is punishment, as far as I'm concerned, we're wasting our time.

Mr. Grose: Thank you very much.

The Vice-Chair (Ms Torsney): Mr. Maloney, there's a bit of time left.

Mr. Maloney: Your comments on the male prostitute who was a long-time proponent of inter-generational sex and your comparison to zero tolerance in advocating violence against women were interesting. In your recommendations you make no reference to that. Is there some reason for this? Do you think we should be going in that direction as well?

Chief Fantino: We have to address this issue. As a sophisticated, mature, democratic society we just can't afford to have people going around espousing the benefits of what is clearly a criminal offence.

Mr. Maloney: I don't disagree with you, but you haven't put it in your recommendations.

Chief Fantino: I think it is in here, sir. I believe it's on page 4. We talk about a zero tolerance policy for advocating violence against women...should the same standard not apply to children?

Until society gets its act together and realizes that we can't afford to have people going around promoting it and talking about its benefits, any more than we can talk about the benefits of how wonderful it has been to have the likes of some of these tyrannical and oppressive leaders of countries, some of whom are still out there... We're talking about the victimization of children.

The Vice-Chair (Ms Torsney): Chief Fantino, with respect, Mr. Maloney was suggesting that on pages 8 and 9 there wasn't a specific recommendation on the limits of free speech or on prosecuting as hate crimes those who propagate hate against children.

Chief Fantino: My apologies, Madam Chair. We are obviously of that view, but we're not in a position as an association to do any more than twig the conscience of Parliament and the committee. But I would certainly add that.

We need to somehow develop the kinds of controls necessary to deal with this kind of rhetoric, and it's not only rhetoric. It's very debilitating. It's a double standard.

Perhaps I can give you a quote from the same person. It was an article authored by him onJuly 8, 1994, which he still ascribes to. He says:

The guy's a walking time bomb.

.1635

The Vice-Chair (Ms Torsney): Do you wish to expand the definition of ``hatred''?

Mr. Ramsay.

Mr. Ramsay: Chief, I can't help but experience a sense of frustration. Here we have a bill that is going to create an offence for someone leaving this country to have sex with a child in another country. Yet, from the facts that I gave earlier, there's not very much being done here to charge those who buy sex from the young children in this country.

You indicated you didn't know too much about what was happening in British Columbia. What about your own police department? Could you provide the committee with statistics, perhaps going back three, four, or five years, on the number of individuals your force has charged, whether they've been convicted or not, for buying sex from youths under the age of 18? Could you do that for us?

Chief Fantino: Yes, Mr. Ramsay, I can give you an overview of one case that went on for a number of years. Some of the matters are still before the courts, so I can't get into specifics - and I won't.

In that particular case, our accused to date number 64 and our victims number 85, some of whom are as young as 8 years of age. That's just in the span of the last couple of years in London and elsewhere in the province, Mr. Ramsay, because our case took us everywhere. Trust me, the work is being done.

However, Madam Chair, what we need to do is raise the awareness. We need to make this a priority item. We need to sensitize the nation to this devastating problem, this victimization of vulnerable people, in much the same way as we've provided the education on smoking, impaired driving, wife abuse. All of these things have been a long time coming to the fore, and now we're very sensitive to these issues, and we're very concerned and conscientious.

I regret to say we haven't as yet come to grips with this devastating situation involving the victimization of children to the extent that it is so. It's very covert. They're actively being preyed upon by adults whose intellect is far superior. They are very vulnerable and the damage is just overwhelming.

On this particular case, we're also doing a study to look at the victimization of these children to see why it happened. How is it that this happened? So we're trying to find answers ourselves.

I can tell you that pornography...all of these issues are interwoven. This is all victimization. In fact, pornography is often used as an enticer, a way to break down the inhibitions of children, by very predatorial, very sophisticated, very cunning adult people, some of whom are in positions of high trust and responsibility over the well-being of children.

Therein lies the problem; we're in denial, sir. Those who dare to speak on this issue are not being heard. Right away, you have a very serious problem in trying to bring this issue forward so we can deal with it for what it is. It's a very serious difficulty.

Mr. Ramsay: You referred to punishment. Do you think punishment is a deterrent in this area?

Chief Fantino: It is a deterrent, because I always believe that if you can keep these pedophiles out of circulation, predatorial as they are, they won't be doing much victimizing. In that context it has a relevance.

.1640

Mr. Ramsay: To protecting society?

Chief Fantino: Yes, sir.

Mr. Ramsay: This is probably the last chance I have to ask you a question or make a comment.

Back in the early 1980s, the Edmonton Journal did a three- or four-week investigation into child prostitution in Edmonton. They revealed that there was a serious problem with child prostitution. An organization I was connected with went to the police commissioner and brought this forward, because it was publicized, of course, through the Edmonton Journal. They denied that there was a problem.

I understand if you have frustration with regard to people standing up and expressing their concern when these kinds of things happen. I don't know whether you need more resources, more people on the street, or tougher laws. I don't know, but when I see that kind of denial back then - and I appeared before that commission - and when I see this article, where only eight people are charged for having sex with these young prostitutes, I ask, well, what is the problem? What can we, as the legislators at the federal level, do to help the police forces deal with that? Does it need more money? Does it need more manpower? Does it need a change in the law?

Chief Fantino: Mr. Ramsay, this is a societal problem. More enforcement, throwing more money at the problem, more police officers, are not really what we're after here. What we're after is for our society, Canadian society, to become informed, aware and concerned about the reality of child sexual exploitation, the exploitation of vulnerable people, the victimization issue.

We're still in denial. We are in denial. We have gone through all kinds of grief and aggravation working on this project I spoke to you about. Yet our conviction rate - and I guess that's a measure of something - in the criminal courts averages out at about 87%. Yet we have been attacked from every quarter because we dared to deal with this issue.

Mr. Ramsay: Who's attacking you?

Chief Fantino: Oh, everybody. It would take me a long time to enunciate all the difficulties we've encountered.

May I give you two quotes that I think are just so telling of how I feel, and how our police community feels, about this issue? It's not a question of more punishment and it's not a question of more police officers. It's not even a question of more laws. George Bernard Shaw said:

I'll give you another one, from Albert Einstein:

Mr. Ramsay, we are still in denial.

In this country we as yet do not appreciate the vulnerability of children, the victimization of children, the trauma, and all of that. Believe me, those who dare touch it get it from every quarter. I can speak personally about that.

The Vice-Chair (Ms Torsney): Thank you, Mr. Ramsay.

Mr. Ramsay: Thank you, Chief.

The Vice-Chair (Ms Torsney): Mr. Kirkby has a question. Then I have a question, if you don't mind.

Mr. Kirkby: I just have a very quick point. I think part of the purpose of this law is to make it easier for police to enforce the law. There were some problems with the way the law was. It was very difficult to obtain proof of an individual seeking the services of an under-age prostitute. Now that the Criminal Code has been changed, the person merely has to believe that the person is under age, allowing police to put undercover officers who are over age in the place of or posing as juvenile prostitutes, and then putting in an evidentiary presumption, which would allow them to prosecute. That's part of the problem that existed before, Mr. Ramsay, but this bill is seeking to assist that.

The Vice-Chair (Ms Torsney): Thank you, Mr. Kirkby.

Chief, I wondered if you could tell me about the practices, specifically in your police force, or how you're working amongst the police chiefs. I understand, from speaking with people who work with street kids in Toronto, that even in a place like Toronto there are of course different precincts. If you're on one side of the street, you're in one precinct; if you're on the other side of the street, you're in another one. Incredibly enough, they have different operating procedures, even within the same police force. If it's kids on this side, it's the johns who are busted; if it's kids on that side, it's the kids who get busted.

.1645

What do you tell your police officers about how to deal with children who are working the streets? It's sort of off topic from this legislation, but it's interesting, because it's part of this whole debate. How are you ensuring consistencies, so it isn't the punishment model you're suggesting, or it isn't the kids who are further victimized by the police forces, but instead it's the perpetrators who are being dealt with?

Chief Fantino: That's a very good question, because we've learned so much, even through this project we were involved in extensively.

One of the things you learn immediately is that these cases are basically victim-driven. In other words, you don't have victims come forward and automatically complain. What happens is that you have to work to dig into the situations and pursue cases from the point of view of victim stories and accounts of events.

I think you're speaking about the prostitution tracks, and so forth, in places like Metro.

The Vice-Chair (Ms Torsney): Jarvis Street -

Chief Fantino: Yes.

The Vice-Chair (Ms Torsney): - if you're in the Pape division, or if you're by the art gallery there. It would seem the art gallery treats kids with a lot more respect and deals more effectively with the problem than the other side of Jarvis Street.

Chief Fantino: There are two issues. That is the overt activity everybody identifies. You know where it's at, the scene is very much manifested, and you know right away that this is a prostitution track, male, female, and on it goes.

That's a concern. Obviously that's a very serious concern to communities. It's a nuisance problem. Certainly you have to believe - and I tell you sincerely - that those kids are controlled by pimps. There's always the pimp, there's always the money equation, there's always power and control in here.

What we try to do is go after the pimps, because those kids are victims themselves. Even those kids who are out there prostituting, they are the victims. We're trying to educate our people to regard those folks as victims, and go after the cause, the power and control base. That's one issue.

The other issue, of course, is this item that's covert, that you don't see: the victimization in the home, the victimization in other surroundings where kids are supposedly protected -

The Vice-Chair (Ms Torsney): Schools and churches.

Chief Fantino: That's correct.

To me there are two issues, and we have to become far more sensitive to these victimization issues.

We encourage our people to look at these young prostitutes as victims, and I know they are. I know some don't want to hear that. Some don't like to be referred to as victims, but if they had another choice, I'm sure they wouldn't be on the streets selling their bodies or providing sexual services.

However we interpret that...

The Vice-Chair (Ms Torsney): So if we went to the London police force, for instance, we wouldn't see kids being charged with prostitution or soliciting then?

Chief Fantino: You would see very few. You would see a lot of witnesses, if you know what I mean.

The Vice-Chair (Ms Torsney): If you're talking to the youngsters, apparently it's the 12- and 13-year-old kids working the streets of Toronto who are pimped. The 16- and 17-year-olds are often out on their own or working with friends. They're not actually being pimped, and they feel quite empowered. So it's kind of a different mindset sometimes.

It's just curious to me why, within the same police force, they can't get their act together and deal with it in a more effective way. Kids are actually a lot more intelligent than they give them... They know which side of Jarvis Street to hang out on, so the john gets busted and they don't.

Chief Fantino: Your observation has not been lost on me. I also know from my personal experience that we have taken a bit of a cavalier attitude towards some of this.

So, Mr. Ramsay, when I talk about denial or ignoring a problem, I'm talking about all of us, including the police, the courts, and those who make the legislation.

What we have to look at is a different kind of attitude. We have to start looking at this. Again, forgive me for repeating myself, but at one time drinking and driving was a socially acceptable kind of activity; it no longer is. Smoking was no big deal.

.1650

That's the frustration we have, that we have to shift our priorities, even in policing, if you will, and we're trying to do that. But the reality is that we're event-driven, like we're on a production line. We have calls for service that don't stop. They don't slow down, and we don't have the on/off switch. We have limited resources to pay a lot of time and attention to some of these long-term, very difficult problems, because the issue isn't just to effect an arrest, lock up a pimp and use these kids for witnesses. We have learned that we have to pay a lot of attention, we have to plug in to a lot of the support entities with these kids, to help them cope with this situation now of no longer being on the streets, no longer... We have to give kids an option. Just throwing them in jail or throwing them into the justice system is no option at all.

This particular case we are still dealing with in London has been a very time-consuming, very difficult case, because our investigators not only have dealt with the criminal aspect, the offences, but they've had to deal with all those other issues: partnerships with the medical health officer; the children's aid society; the victim-witness people. You have to keep those kids plugged in and help them try to recuperate their lives.

The Vice-Chair (Ms Torsney): Mr. Schultz, you wanted to comment?

Mr. Schultz: Yes, I just have a quick comment. From an association point of view, we've been quite involved in domestic violence, child abuse studies, and so on, for a number of years.

Three years ago, at our conference in Halifax, we highlighted the type of thing Chief Fantino is talking about, the victimization of the young people who are being exploited as prostitutes. We have no sort of control over our members - we can't tell them what to do - but we try to highlight the areas of concern. We did so at that time because of particular developments in the Halifax area, where a young prostitute had been in danger and had to be taken into protective custody. There was a whole ring of young prostitutes operating, being picked up by pimps, and even shipped into the Toronto area at the time.

So we have produced a number of papers over the past several years dealing with various aspects of domestic violence and trying to encourage our members on the various police forces on how they should respond and work with other agencies on this type of problem.

The Vice-Chair (Ms Torsney): Thank you, Mr. Schultz.

Perhaps we could have some of those papers, or if there were directives or discussion documents amongst them it would be interesting for us to have those, especially if we wanted to share them with our local police forces.

[Translation]

Mr. Leblanc, no more questions? Mr. Rideout, please.

[English]

Mr. Rideout (Moncton): I have two questions. One is just a picayune one. In your report you talk about the crime rate going up by 8% over the last decade. The information we've been getting on crime rates is that they're in kind of a downward trend. I just wondered where that might have come from. It's on page 3 of the...

Chief Fantino: It came from the conference in Ottawa I cited. In any event, I think when we talk about figures we're very often getting hung up on this year versus last year.

I'll just share this with you, Madam Chair, if I may. Coincidentally, we have the rate for youth violent crime, for instance. It has been increasing at a substantially faster pace than adult violent crime. Between 1986 and 1994, the number of youths charged with violent crimes increased at an average annual rate of 13%.

So we're looking at it over the long haul, but quite correctly, there has been a bit of a decline in some areas.

Just to give you an idea, in London to date this year, versus last year, we're down 8% I like to think that's because of good police management.

Mr. Rideout: Yes, and we're taking credit for the reduction in interest rates.

Chief Fantino: Same drill.

I just have to say this. Quite correctly, if we can dedicate more time to doing proactive things - problem solving, working with kids, the vulnerable groups - I know we can positively affect the outcome.

Mr. Rideout: Maybe this is being picky on the language, but the other one has to do with your suggestion that proposed paragraph 212(2.1)(b) of Bill C-27 be removed. As I read this paragraph, there's no question that it talks about violence, but it also talks about intimidation or coercion. If we remove this paragraph, it perhaps removes the idea of intimidation and coercion as well, and that wouldn't be available.

.1655

Chief Fantino: I think what we mean there, sir, is that we don't really think there should be any qualifiers. If you victimize a child, you should just get the hammer.

Mr. Rideout: Okay. When you say delete this paragraph, which makes violence a necessary component, there's also intimidation and coercion.

Chief Fantino: Yes. We would just want to look at the offence pro bono, without added qualifications or conditions. It's basically hands off, period.

Mr. Rideout: Okay.

The Vice-Chair (Ms Torsney): The mention of the hammer wasn't actually preaching violence as a method of solution, was it?

Some hon. members: Oh, oh!

Mr. Rideout: We could always use the threat of violence.

The Vice-Chair (Ms Torsney): Just checking. We might have to call in that free speech...

Mr. Rideout: I'm not going to ask another question.

The Vice-Chair (Ms Torsney): Mr. Ramsay, if you have a question, we have time for you.

Mr. Ramsay: Thank you, Madam Chair. There were just a couple of things.

I've put your recommendations away, but you recommended that the age be raised to 18 years. Anyone under the age... Of course, you would exempt those people under the age who are married or living common law?

Chief Fantino: Yes, Mr. Ramsay. We took it as a given that legal activity would be consensual, would be -

Mr. Ramsay: And exempted?

Chief Fantino: Yes.

Mr. Ramsay: Okay. From your experience with this whole business, this whole trade of child prostitution, and those who will travel not only miles in this country but hundreds of thousands of miles to other countries to satisfy their desires, do you feel they're motivated by a sexual orientation?

Chief Fantino: They're motivated by the urge to engage in this activity. They travel to these places because the availability is there and the consequences are minimal.

There are a lot of reasons for that. Some of the countries don't pay a whole lot of attention to the problem. In some countries there is the corruption of officials.

Kids are sold. We heard that in Sweden. We're talking about commercializing certain offences or there being a profit. We're talking about third world countries that actually sell their kids; they're put out on the market for sexual activity.

The other thing that's been said to us time and time again is that the pedophiles believe that the younger the children, the less likelihood of there being an HIV issue.

Mr. Ramsay: You can't sell something if no one is buying, so I'm getting to the buyer. I'm asking about the buyer. Do you feel they're motivated by a sexual orientation? Can they be cured? Can they be treated?

The Vice-Chair (Ms Torsney): There's a psychology degree -

Chief Fantino: I can't speak to that, Mr. Ramsay. I can tell you that I have layman's information only. I wouldn't want to in any way influence this honourable body by giving my layman's take on it.

Mr. Ramsay: I'm just asking. Thank you.

Chief Fantino: Pedophiles scare me, though.

The Vice-Chair (Ms Torsney): Well, you're over the age, so it...

Mr. Ramsay, on this issue of the sexual predator, I can recommend to you a paper done for the conference in Stockholm. I believe the library has it. It's quite a fascinating document, because there are different types of people who are motivated for different reasons. It's actually quite a phenomenal piece of work.

If it's not in the library, you could call Senator Pearson's office. I'm sure she has a copy she would share with you. It's quite fascinating. There are a lot more different motivations than you'd think.

Mr. Ramsay: Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

The Vice-Chair (Ms Torsney): To both our witnesses, thank you very much for coming and for this presentation on behalf of the chiefs of police. We wish you a safe journey back.

Thanks to all our colleagues for attending today. This meeting is adjourned.

Return to Committee Home Page

;