Today is the first sitting of the committee stage of the Police and Crime Bill. Part two of the Bill deals with prostitution. This bill is one of the most badly drafted and stupid pieces of legislation that I've ever come across (excuse the schoolboy pun).
Let me give you a few examples.
Clause 16 will require that the prostitute to have 3 meetings with an undefined official for rather vague reasons. If they don't go they'll go to prison or be fined. What will these three meetings achieve? I suspect that there won't be too many cases of hookers suddenly saying mid conversation "So that's where I've been going wrong all of these years. Now I can become the managing director of Barclays Bank". If there was an option to attend drug / alcohol rehabilitation courses, with proper monitoring & mentoring for young girls, I'd say fine. 3 Meetings with an official? Ill thought out and badly drafted.
Clause 20 gives the Police the power to close a brothel for 3 months. Now if you are living in the flat below Mrs Whiplash and you are kept up all night by the sound of naughty high court judges getting a good thrashing for being naughty boys, then you may be rather pleased. What puzzles me is why 3 months. Personally I'd license brothels and make sure they were properly run, but if you are going to close them down, why pick a random number out of the air? We all know what will happen, the police will do what they already do and the brothels will do what they already do. Will the problem go away? I doubt it. If the establishment was licensed and the owners knew they'd lose the lot permanently, the chances are they'd run it in such a way that no one knew they were there. Then there is the question as to what the prostitutes do. Do they run off and become nuns, devoting their life to prayer? I doubt it. They either find another brothel and the problem moves or they go on the streets and make life even worse for residents. Girls don't become prostitutes because their life has turned out how they wanted. It is driven by circumstance and need.
Many of the prostitutes working in London are girls who have been trafficked. Many are living the lifestyle of slaves. Many brothels are poorly run and girls are treated far worse than the average family dog or cat. Many prostitues face daily violence as a condition of employment. Many take hard drugs to escape the horror of their situation. Given that prostitution is the last resort of desperate women, it is clear to me that this bill is just a knee jerk reaction to a symptom. It won't solve the problem, it will just make people unsafe.
Passing Laws which make bad situations worse is the height of stupidity.
I hope it gets thrown out. It seems to me that this bill is yet another example of laziness in the process of scrutiny. I wait with interest to read what MP's made of this bill and I will be following this up.
The most sensible comments I've seen regarding this bill have come from the MP for Bedfordshire - Nadine Dorries on her blog - http://blog.dorries.org/Blog.aspx?Y=2009&M=Feb&d=02#02
It seems she's a former nurse, so presumably has had a little bit more experience of life than many of our cossetted career MP's. We need more MP's from this sort of background and a few less former lawyers and Bankers.
Tuesday, 3 February 2009
Stupid new laws - Part 1.
Today is the first sitting of the committee stage of the Police and Crime Bill. Part two of the Bill deals with prostitution. This bill is one of the most badly drafted and stupid pieces of legislation that I've ever come across (excuse the schoolboy pun).
Let me give you a few examples.
Clause 16 will require that the prostitute to have 3 meetings with an undefined official for rather vague reasons. If they don't go they'll go to prison or be fined. What will these three meetings achieve? I suspect that there won't be too many cases of hookers suddenly saying mid conversation "So that's where I've been going wrong all of these years. Now I can become the managing director of Barclays Bank". If there was an option to attend drug / alcohol rehabilitation courses, with proper monitoring & mentoring for young girls, I'd say fine. 3 Meetings with an official? Ill thought out and badly drafted.
Clause 20 gives the Police the power to close a brothel for 3 months. Now if you are living in the flat below Mrs Whiplash and you are kept up all night by the sound of naughty high court judges getting a good thrashing for being naughty boys, then you may be rather pleased. What puzzles me is why 3 months. Personally I'd license brothels and make sure they were properly run, but if you are going to close them down, why pick a random number out of the air? We all know what will happen, the police will do what they already do and the brothels will do what they already do. Will the problem go away? I doubt it. If the establishment was licensed and the owners knew they'd lose the lot permanently, the chances are they'd run it in such a way that no one knew they were there. Then there is the question as to what the prostitutes do. Do they run off and become nuns, devoting their life to prayer? I doubt it. They either find another brothel and the problem moves or they go on the streets and make life even worse for residents. Girls don't become prostitutes because their life has turned out how they wanted. It is driven by circumstance and need.
Many of the prostitutes working in London are girls who have been trafficked. Many are living the lifestyle of slaves. Many brothels are poorly run and girls are treated far worse than the average family dog or cat. Many prostitues face daily violence as a condition of employment. Many take hard drugs to escape the horror of their situation. Given that prostitution is the last resort of desperate women, it is clear to me that this bill is just a knee jerk reaction to a symptom. It won't solve the problem, it will just make people unsafe.
Passing Laws which make bad situations worse is the height of stupidity.
I hope it gets thrown out. It seems to me that this bill is yet another example of laziness in the process of scrutiny. I wait with interest to read what MP's made of this bill and I will be following this up.
The most sensible comments I've seen regarding this bill have come from the MP for Bedfordshire - Nadine Dorries on her blog - http://blog.dorries.org/Blog.aspx?Y=2009&M=Feb&d=02#02
It seems she's a former nurse, so presumably has had a little bit more experience of life than many of our cossetted career MP's. We need more MP's from this sort of background and a few less former lawyers and Bankers.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment