It’s hard to understand why PEERS Victoria wouldn’t qualify for a share of federal funding aimed at helping sex workers leave the trade. The organization was founded for that purpose, although it has expanded its scope considerably since then.
The federal government has proposed a $20-million plan for an “exit strategy” that will support existing programs and partner with groups helping people leave the sex trade. But PEERS Victoria was told by the government last week that it is ineligible for a share of that funding, “which was really weird to us because we are one of the original organizations in Canada that do this kind of work,” said executive director Rachel Phillips.
The government plan is an offshoot of its Protection of Communities and Exploited Persons Act, which became law last year. It was created after the Supreme Court of Canada struck down the country’s prostitution laws.
The legislation has stirred considerable criticism — from sex-trade workers who say the law puts them in danger, and from aboriginal groups and law-enforcement officials who say the $20 million over five years allotted by the government is insufficient.
In the capital region last week on an unrelated matter, Justice Minister Peter MacKay said the funding for the sex-trade exit strategy has already been “over-subscribed.”
PEERS Victoria, formed in 1995, was originally a loosely organized group supporting women who wanted to leave the sex trade. As it grew, it expanded its services to the point where it now provides an array of outreach and drop-in harm-reduction and support services, as well as education and employment training, for current and former sex workers. It continues to aid those who want to leave.
If any group deserves a share of the federal funding, it’s this one, and it certainly needs it.
The Conservative government would like to eradicate prostitution in Canada. It’s a goal that few governments, if any, have ever achieved, and the Canadian government certainly won’t make much headway with ill-conceived legislation and stingy allocation of resources.
Does money make a difference? Jody Paterson, a former Times Colonist editor turned social activist who was executive director of PEERS Victoria for three years, certainly thought so.
This is what Paterson wrote in a 2008 column, as the B.C. attorney general was preparing to appeal the acquittal of mass murderer Willie Pickton on first-degree murder charges (he was found guilty on second-degree murder charges):
“We spent $20 million to gather enough evidence to charge Willie Pickton with murder. We spent another $46 million to convict him. I guess we’ll just have to take Attorney General Wally Oppal’s word that we may need to spend many millions more to try Pickton all over again — for zero gain, seeing as the mass murderer has already been handed the maximum sentence for his crimes against B.C. women.
“But what a difference the smallest fraction of all that money could have made in changing the lives of the broken women Pickton preyed upon.
“Why is it we have money for the desperate women working our streets only after they’re dead?”
If the government is really serious about reducing prostitution and its attendant harms, it should devote less money to such things as ads that promote the Conservatives’ election prospects, and provide more resources to groups such as PEERS Victoria, which counts its pennies and nickels as it works on behalf of the people whose very lives are at risk.
