Toleration zones
Apparently it was that well known liberal, David Blunkett, who wanted to change the law to set up toleration zones for prostitution together with other reforms which would have effectively decriminalised it. His hopes of having a 'serious debate' on the issue were, apparently, thwarted by fear of the media.
I think that what thwarted the plans for toleration zones is that they were not, in fact, a very good idea. Glasgow Council produced a response to the consultation which is well worth reading, it challenges the claims made in favour of toleration zones and offers a set of alternative evidence-based policy recommendations (the full report can be read here).
Instead of toleration zones, offering opportunities to help women exit prostitution were suggested in response to the consultation, including more resources put into women-only residential drugs treatment centres that are immediate access and adequately and sustainably funded; schools that encourage every young woman to aspire to a career and to achieve, and a variety of well-paid jobs to be open to women; a homelessness strategy that recognises that the major cause of women’s homelessness is family breakup and domestic violence; and real anti-pimping and anti-coercion strategies to prevent young vulnerable women being groomed by older “boyfriends” and coerced into prostitution. Needless to say, little if any of this has happened in the past year, and it will be interesting to see whether Gordon Brown and John Reid come up with funding to start to make a difference come the spending review.
Unlike David Blunkett, I also think this is a problem which would benefit from more widespread use of ASBOs against the people causing alarm, harrassment and distress (that is a rather odd sentence to write). This does not mean using ASBOs against prostitutes, which is a totally malign and misguided policy. The people causing the problem are the men who pay for sex, and Asbos, 'naming and shaming', driving bans for convicted kerb crawlers are deterrents which can to make sure that prostitution is not seen as 'the world's oldest profession', but instead is regarded as Glasgow Council's submission put it:
"Violence, experience of abuse, homelessness, poverty and drugs are at the root of street prostitution in Glasgow. The Council absolutely rejects the view of prostitution as work, which merely requires legalising and regulating. The Council absolutely rejects the argument that prostitution is a civil right – no woman wants the right to be sexually exploited, abused and demeaned."
2 Comments:
The Observer was awful on this the other day only giving the pro-legalisation of prostitution arguments. Then there was this columnist Henry Porter they now seem to have who favours scrapping free healthcare. I suppose it has never been a socialist paper, but increasingly it seems right leaning liberal rather than left leaning liberal.
I agree that the onus should be on punishing prostitute users/pimps, but surely we shouldn't rule out the use of ASBOs completely. For example, if the government was far-sighted enough to invest heavily in rehabilitation programmes for prostitutes to get off drugs and acquire new skills aimed at empowering them to move away from prositution, I think it would be justified in punishing women not accepting the treatment/education opportunities, at least with the aim of keeping them off the streets. Tough love and all that.
Henry Porter doesn't appreciate the importance of universalist services. He gets more angry about CCTV and ASBOs than poverty and cycles of criminality. Classic middle-class liberal.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home