Ash Regan launches 'Unbuyable' bill to ban prostitution in Scotland

[ArabellaScott]

https://www.albaparty.org/regan_lodges_unbuyable_bill

'Ash Regan MSP has today [Tuesday 20 May] formally lodged her Prostitution (Offences and Support) (Scotland) Bill—known as the Unbuyable Bill—in the Scottish Parliament.
The Bill proposes a bold and long-overdue step towards ending the commercial sexual exploitation of women and girls in Scotland. It will criminalise the purchase of sex, repeal outdated offences that target the seller, quash historic convictions, and create a statutory right to support for those in and exiting prostitution.
Speaking ahead of the Bill's formal introduction, Alba Party’s Ash Regan MSP said:
"Prostitution is not a job like any other, as some lobby groups claim; it is a system of commercial sexual exploitation that targets the vulnerable, is driven by demand and is enabled by silence. Commodifying human beings has consequences - it's time we reframe the shame.
"Today, I am proud to bring commercial sexual exploitation out of the shadows into a debate across Scotland, by formally lodging the Unbuyable Bill in Parliament. Unbuyable is the first key step in tackling attitudes that have shamefully normalised inequality of the sexes and underpinned the scourge of male violence against women
"It is a Bill forged by those who have survived the system of exploitation, for their own recovery and for those still trapped inside or vulnerable to such exploitation. It recognises what so many are afraid to say: that buying sexual access to a human being is a form of male violence.
"We must reframe shame. It does not belong to exploited women and men—it belongs to the men who buy them."
"The Bill aligns with the Nordic Model— adopted in countries such as Sweden, Norway, France, and Ireland—and marks a departure from the failed approach of decriminalising the sex trade, without addressing the root cause and consequences of commodifying human beings: demand."'

Thanks, @Christinapple, but this isn't really explaining your thoughts - why are you inclined to align with Scotland for Decrim's position, and not that of other groups of current and former sex workers who do support the Nordic Model and the bill?

The more I think about the Reporting Scotland piece, the more annoyed I get. It was pure propaganda: "I was in a difficult place financially, my friend got me into it because she got great money from it" and "there's too much red tape already, if I set up with a friend, it'd be classified as a brothel :(", a bit about criminalising getting rid of all the apparently lovely punters. An absence of those who escaped or those who support Ash. It's a familiar media tactic for when there's a troon on vs feminist - feelings vs facts.

The woman was disguised, but tbh, given this is the the BBC, it may not even have been a woman at all.

I'm sure it won't get through but good for her. Any man who 'buys sex' is a rapist.

It's absurd that it won't get through; it has been SNP policy for years. Overview here: https://archive.is/gXLwB

But as I said in my previous post, liberalisation decriminalisation has become the easy, socially acceptable solution for the chattering classes.

I was dismayed earlier this year by being asked to fill in a questionnaire for a colleague's child's Modern Studies school project on the subject, clearly influenced by a school curriculum focused on the 'bodily autonomy' argument rather than paying any attention to an understanding of the associated exploitation, abuse, trafficking and assault that you would think would be a required part of tackling this topic. I can't think of a more inappropriate way of presenting it to teenagers.

Sex worker org Scotland For Decrim's position is also the same position held by Amnesty International, The World Health Org, Human Rights Watch, Anti-Slavery International, Global Alliance against Traffic in Women, UNAIDS & UNFPA, Freedom United (anti-trafficking org), PICUM (Dutch based org concerned with the rights and safety of migrants in Europe), GAATW (The Global Alliance Against Traffic in Women), HIV Scotland, STOPAIDS, sex worker orgs and the Royal College of Nursing amongst others.

Yes these names come up a lot and for good reason. I hope when the time comes for debate in parliament both sides will be looked at including the reasons why all the above orgs and others are opposed to the NM and instead prefer decriminalisation.

In 2022 Belgium became the first European country to pass decriminalisation, as well as NZ many Australian states have in recent years switched from legalisation to decriminalisation, showing that the NM isn't the only "modern" approach.

"why not that of other groups of current and former sex workers who do support the Nordic Model and the bill?"

FWS and Women won't Wheest aren't made up of sex workers? Aside from 1 individual who was a sex trafficker whom the anti sex-work tabloids are taking full advantage of I'm not seeing any support for Regan from any actual former or current sex workers? I do see many sex workers in a panic over this bill though.

Not sure where you got FWS and Women Won't Wheesht from, @Christinapple? I don't think any of us mentioned them. The thread of interviews from Gina Davidson that I linked earlier is a powerful set of statements from sex trafficking survivor Fiona Broadfoot of Build A Girl, who addresses the issue of decriminalisation directly. She also co-coordinates the Hope Campaign, ex-sex workers who campaign on this issue: https://www.centreforwomensjustice.org.uk/hope. I think Amnesty lost credibility on women's issues a pretty long time ago, and a lot of other NGOs are also heavily implicated in sanitising the worst aspects of prostitution; it's pretty clear that their argument for full decriminalisation leads to very bad places for women, and there are lots of survivors who are very firm that the Nordic Model is what they would prefer. There's lots on this in Julie Bindel's 'The Pimping of Prostitution'; you can get a good overview from this review: https://www.feministcurrent.com/2017/09/27/julie-bindels-pimping-prostitution-destroys-sex-trade-myths-unforgiving-detail/

"Aside from 1 individual who was a sex trafficker"

*Sex trafficking victim I meant. Apologies.

Julie Bindel? Didn't she lie about Pornhub having a "war rape category"? Yeah I don't think she has any credibility left.

FWS and Women Wont Wheesht (at least one of them) I noticed replied to the public consultation on the bill in support. I just wonder what Marion Millar (I believe is or was a member of one of them?) knows that Amnesty Int, World Health Org and the others I mentioned don't know about sex work?

Try reading the book; you might find it illuminating. (and apologies, other thread members - I hadn't realised that I was talking to someone with form for sea-lioning. Will disengage now - as you were, everyone!)

Kudos to Ash Regan for getting this bill on the agenda. I'll be following its progress. Fingers crossed.

Good luck ash. Totally support you

The article I linked to upthread discusses New Zealand as an example of decriminalisation, and the consequences.

Consequences of decrim- NZ sex worker receives 6 figure payout after being sexually harassed

www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-55298303

https://www.thenational.scot/news/25191710.ash-regan-faces-questions-ludicrous-costs-prostitution-bill/?ref=twtrec

Article from today. Regan has claimed training officers could be as low as 50p per hour. However Police Scotland say the rates are £79.50 per hour confirmed by a sex worker org who works with sex workers and police. She also claims securing charges would only be an extra 6 hours of police time.

"NUM [sex worker org] said her figures were “laughably false”.

Lynsey Walton, chief executive of NUM, said: “As the UK’s national sex worker safety charity, NUM works with police forces across the country to support sex workers during investigations. This means we know that Regan’s estimates of police time needed to enforce her proposed legislation are laughably false, just like her ludicrous claims that it costs just 50p an hour to train officers.

“Sex worker groups, alongside NGOs like Amnesty and the World <a class="break-all" href="https://archive.ph/o/vAYJU/www.thenational.scot/news/health/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Health Organisation, oppose the new law on the grounds that it will make life more difficult and dangerous for sex workers, while costing taxpayers millions of pounds a year to enforce.”"

https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/prostitution-scotland-just-25-men-a-year-to-be-prosecuted-under-ps26m-ash-regan-proposals-5146461

Regan herself estimates if passed her bill would secure 25 paying for sex convictions a year. However this low figure is still very optimistic given N.Ireland saw one conviction in total since 2015 (sentence was a fine of his choice). In the first 2,000 paying for sex arrests in Sweden only two of these were convicted (only because they confessed, sentence low fine). Sweden has found sex workers are not willing to testify against their clients.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-67802849

https://www.undp.org/sites/g/files/zskgke326/files/publications/Commissions%20report%20final-EN.pdf p38

Herald article today (<a class="break-all" href="https://web.archive.org/web/20250601114411/www.heraldscotland.com/news/25204449.ash-regan-i-wont-hide-prostitution-issue-like-msps/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Archive link) which came up on my newsfeed with this unfortunate pull quote (pasted in case the image doesn't work)

"Asked about concerns her bill could drive prostitution to an unregulated and underground system, Ms Regan said: "There is no basis for any of those assertions.

"If you even think for one second, you cannot possibly drive prostitution underground.

"If you had a lot of women in underground cellars with a locked door, how would the punters get to them?"

The Herald clarified that the point being made was that if someone wants to buy sex, they would simply do so illegally.

Asked if that made sense, Ms Regan said: "No. It does not really make sense whatsoever."

It's an excellent bill I spoke to her about it at an event I was at and she's so passionate about it. Yet also very disappointed that many of her colleagues are just ignoring it. This I believe is politically motivated which is just a really spiteful thing to do when it is a bill that would be otherwise supported.

The Scottish Libdems do not support her bill.

"Thank you for getting in touch about this issue and Ash Regan’s proposed Bill.

There are, understandably, many different views held on this issue, and it is important that as this Bill progresses through the parliamentary stages, those views are heard.

The Scottish Liberal Democrats believe that we must decriminalise sex work in line with best international practice to reduce harm and the risks to those involved, rather than take the measures outlined in this Bill.

While criminalisation may address some issues associated with sex work, it is the Scottish Liberal Democrats’ understanding that where the purchase of sex has been criminalised, as proposed in this Bill, sex workers have been further marginalised and endangered as a result.

Where sex work has instead been decriminalised there has been a much-improved relationship with the police, greater protection from exploitation and abuse, a reduction in the number of cases of violence against sex workers and increased uptake of support and health services.

I hope this has helped to set out my position on this matter and if there is anything else I can do to help then please do let me know.

Best Wishes,"

"Yet also very disappointed that many of her colleagues are just ignoring it"

I wonder why. Perhaps because they found out the Nordic Model is strongly opposed by Amnesty Int, the World Health Org, UNAIDs, Human Rights Watch, anti-trafficking orgs and sex workers orgs on the grounds it increases violence for sex workers, makes sex workers less likely to uptake support and health services, and enforcing it costs a fortune and is difficult to enforce given evidence is difficult to obtain and sex workers do not testify against their clients.

Under the Nordic Model sex workers are still committing a crime if they work together (so saying the NM "decriminalises" sex workers is wrong).

N.Ireland where the NM is basically unenforced has had the NM for a decade and have convicted one client. Sweden convicted only 2 clients in the first 2000 arrests and that was only because they confessed.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-67802849

https://hivlawcommission.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/FinalReport-RisksRightsHealth-EN.pdf

"If you had a lot of women in underground cellars with a locked door, how would the punters get to them?"

How silly. In the Nordic Model sex workers are still working in their own homes, sharing properties (which is still illegal for them) and doing outcalls etc (possibly on the streets too but this is less common today because of modern technology) doing business as usual and advertising as usual. Sex workers and clients just have to take more precautions to avoid being caught like not carry condoms (one of the reasons the W.H.O. do not support the NM), meet more discreetly and be careful not to mention sex or payment or anything when texting etc.

Quite right, Christinapple. Drugs are underground but people can get them easily. You would think that if drug users can find a drug dealer then so can the police, but it doesn't work like that. Sex work can be in the hands of professional criminals or it can be in the hands of the sex workers themselves. Women should be allowed to work together without being criminalized for 'brothel-keeping'.

People who believe in the Nordic model will say that in their system sex workers aren't criminalized. That is not true though, as we saw in Ireland where women are still arrested for brothel-keeping. Like the two Romanian women in their 20s who shared a flat.

There has been a review of the 2017 Nordic model law change in Ireland released recently, a month or two ago. It is called Review on the Operation of Section 7A of the Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Act 1993. It says that there has not been a decrease in demand. The interim review of 2020 by Dr Geoffrey Shannon said the same thing. The review of the Northern Ireland Nordic model law said the same thing too.

Why does Ash Regan want to introduce a law that doesn't work? Perhaps she is not aware of the recent review of the Irish Nordic model law. Hopefully someone in the Scottish Parliament will point it out to her. It didn't work in Sweden either, they manipulated the statistics to make it appear that it worked.