CANADA DEBATE

Age of consent should not be raised: panel

Last Wednesday, panellists at a McGill talk entitled “The Age of Consent” slammed Steven Harper’s proposed Bill C-22, which would to raise the age of legally granting consent to have sex from 14 to 16 years old. The bill also proposes to change its title to the “age of protection.”

Bill C-22 is ostensibly aimed at protecting children from sexual predators. However, panellist Robert Leckey, a McGill professor of Family Law, said that the law would do less for young people than it would for the image of the Conservative government. “I’m not really convinced there is a problem here, he said. [It’s] an inexpensive way for Conservatives to send a message to certain constituencies that they care about children.”

He came out against the Bill, arguing that it perpetuated an idea of young people as “helpless children needing to be protected by the state,” and that it would allow law enforcement to pick and choose whom they prosecute for illegal sexual activity. “There’s no reason to think the law would be applied equally across straight people and sexual minorities,” he said, pointing out that laws forbidding sex in public parks have been disproportionately applied against queer people, and that municipal bylaws tend to be more strictly enforced against visible minorities.

Panellist Lance Lamore, an HIV educator with Aids Community Care Montreal (ACCM), condemned the Bill for its potential to harm teens rather than help them, by cutting teens out of the demographic of sexually active individuals targeted by organizations like his. “[It would] make it extremely difficult to make sure youth have access to the resources they need,” he said.

He argued it would make it even less likely that teens would get adequate information should they choose to have sex. Sex education classes were removed from Quebec public schools last year to be incorporated into other classes, but Lamore doubted that students would get any important information from the regular curriculum. “It could put an end to open discussion where sexual health is concerned,” he said. “Whose math or geography teacher is going to talk to them about sex? It’s not going to happen.” He also said that the Bill would not serve to reduce sexual activity among teens, since rates of sexual activity are highest among those with substance abuse problems, lower incomes, and strained family relationships, which are “not the sorts of things C-22 is going to tackle.”

Members of Queer McGill who were present worried that teens that are sexually active may be afraid or reluctant to seek medical advice and STI testing because of the proposed changes to the law.

The Bill passed its second reading in the House of Commons in October, and has not faced any serious challenges. Many present expressed frustration, feeling powerless to stop the Bill and surprised at the lack of organized opposition to it. Professor Lamore said that the lack of response was a strategic one. “Groups you would hope would be active on this issue are saving their political capital for when the marriage issue returns,” he said, adding that he expects the Bill will easily become law.

The legislation contains a close-in-age exception, allowing a 14 or 15 year old to legally have sex with a partner within five years of their age – which would be up from the current allowance of only two years. The age for anal intercourse and exploitative activity like pornography would remain at 18.

Nora Mulloy
6 November 2006

http://www.mcgilldaily.com/view.php?aid=5527

home / Previous feature