Unbuyable Debate – Some Reflections
It is not often that you will hear me talking about Parliament TV as gripping, but there is no better way to describe the debate of the Prostitution (Offences and Support) (Scotland) Bill that took place on 3rd February in the Scottish Parliament.
Members of the Scottish Parliament (MSPs) were voting on whether to progress Alba Party MSP Ash Regan’s Member’s Bill, known as the Unbuyable Bill, to the next stage.
The Unbuyable Bill proposed four main components, based on the Nordic Model:
Criminalise the purchase of sex in Scotland
Repeal prostitution-related offences
Quash historic convictions for prostitution-related offences
Introduce a right to assistance and support for people in, or exiting from, prostitution
Ash Regan started the debate by asking us to collectively recognise prostitution for what it is, a system of exploitation and violence sustained by demand. She made an impassioned plea for action, stating that not taking action is not neutrality, it is a decision.
She also pointed out that no country that has adopted the Nordic Model has ever reversed it:
‘Once a society decides that human beings are not commodities, it does not go back.’
And so began the debate…
Across parties, there was consistent agreement on one thing, that prostitution is violence against women and girls (VAWG).
Speaker after speaker acknowledged this.
Yet, despite recognising prostitution as VAWG, it seemed there was reluctance to progress the Bill any further. Lack of time, alongside the complexity of the issues, was repeatedly given as a reason to pause. But, as Michelle Thomson (SNP) reminded her colleagues, ‘complexity cannot be an alibi for inaction’.
Yes, it may be a complex policy area, but as Ash and others stated, we need to engage with the data and the evidence, which shows consistently that the Nordic Model is the only model that reduces harm.
Michelle Thomson listed the many forms of violence that are perpetrated upon women within the context of prostitution. It was a long and brutal list. Rape, defecation, strangulation PTSD, to name but a few. She asked the question: Who here would argue for the rights of the abusers?
However, it seemed that some were willing to do just that.
Maggie Chapman (Scottish Greens) repeated the mantra, ‘sex work is work’, and it was suggested that: ‘Many do it out of their own free will. They find it meaningful and fulfilling, it earns them a good living and puts food on the table.’
But, as Ruth Maguire (SNP) pointed out, if this really is work, why don’t we suggest it as an option for work experience for young people? Maybe we should take benefits from job seekers who refuse to enter the sex trade for a living?
Rhoda Grant (Scottish Labour) made a similar point, asking, would you still think of it as an ‘ordinary job’ if it was your mum or daughter doing it?
Whilst some people may say they freely choose to sell sex (and I am yet to meet one single woman who has maintained this position after leaving the sex trade), public policy should not be built around exceptional cases, but rather patterns of harm. These are depressingly well documented within the sex trade. Indeed, we heard about the evidence from both Police Scotland and the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service, including how men who buy sex are disproportionately linked to domestic abuse and other forms of VAWG.
The end result?
The Scottish Parliament voted against progressing the Bill by 64 votes to 54.
The FiLiA Women First team met last week and reflected on the outcome of this vote. We salute Ash Regan in her bravery for trying to get this Bill passed. We share her despair at the lack of courage shown by those MSPs who voted against it.
We talked about the mental gymnastics required by those who recognise the violence inherent in the sex trade, yet at the same time seek to legitimise prostitution (effectively rape for money) as ordinary work.
We wondered whose voices are being heard – and whose are not?
Overall, we felt saddened at the missed opportunity to provide support to women and hope that this vote will not mark the end of action for women exploited in the sex trade.
Our Freedom of Information (FOI) request that we carried out last year revealed that specialist provision for women in the sex trade is patchy, with fewer than one in five local authority areas commissioning a dedicated service.
Fewer than 10% of areas include services for women in prostitution within their VAWG strategies.
We have developed a dedicated audit tool that can be undertaken in partnership with local authorities. It assesses current provision, identifies gaps and suggests practical steps to improve outcomes for women exploited in the sex trade.
We call on local authorities to work with us to use this audit tool.
We call on policymakers to listen to the voices of survivors of the sex trade, not just those with the loudest platforms.
And we will continue to call out prostitution for what it is – violence against women and girls.
Hannah Shead, FiLiA Women First Project Lead