There have been three attempts this year to introduce the Nordic model into Britain. Ash Regan is a Scottish MSP. She has introduced a bill that will punish men who pay for sex. She caused much hilarity in social media when she responded to a question about prostitution being driven underground.
"If you had a lot of women in underground cellars with a locked door, how would the punters get to them?"
People thought that she didn't understand what 'underground' meant and thought that it meant literally moving to underground cellars. I don't think she actually meant that though, her point was that if a punter can find a prostitute then so can the police. Therefore the police can find prostitution and put a stop to it. I have heard this argument many times.
If that was her point, which she failed to get across, then she is wrong. A drug user can find a drug dealer but the police can't. People can buy drugs easily and the police can't put a stop to it. Also, even if the police could locate prostitutes that doesn't really help them because the prostitutes aren't doing anything illegal. All the police could do is to try to observe their clients but they still have to prove that the man has paid for sex or agreed to pay for sex.
"The data that we have shows that in Sweden [where prostitution is illegal], prostitution has reduced to a very low level," she said."
"It has not extinguished it completely but it has reduced it to a very low level. But fundamentally, sex trafficking is almost non-existent in Sweden, if not non-existent."
This is complete nonsense. Does she not know that the review of the Irish Nordic model law published this year shows that there has been no decrease in demand? There is also the 2020 interim review and the review of the Northern Ireland Nordic model law.
How can she believe that prostitution in Sweden has reduced to a very low level and that sex trafficking is non-existent or almost non-existent? The data we have does not show that.
Claims are being made that if the bill passes it will decriminalize prostitutes. That is not true. It is not illegal to be a prostitute but it is illegal for two or more women to work together for safety. Regan's bill will not affect that. Women will still be arrested. They talk about safety but if they want to make women safe they should stop arresting them for so-called brothel-keeping.
Prostitution is dangerous under certain conditions but in Soho no sex worker has been murdered since 1947. That is because there are always two women in the flat, the sex worker is never alone with a man, and because they are not drug addicts. A minority of sex workers are drug addicts and their world is a violent world.
Ash Regan's bill is called the Prostitution (Offences and Support) (Scotland) Bill. She is also calling it the 'Unbuyable Bill'. Which is odd, because I have never bought anyone. Another attempt to bring the Nordic model to Britain is a bill passing through the House of Commons called the Crime and Policing Bill. Some people have tried to get amendments to it. The one that is of interest to me is "This new clause makes it an offence to pay for, or attempt to, pay for sex either for themselves or on behalf of others".
It seems to be Labour MP Tonia Antoniazzi who proposed the amendment, but she is supported by over 50 other MPs and UK Feminista. They don't seem to care that help for women to exit prostitution and decriminalizing prostitutes were always regarded as an integral part of the Nordic model. You can't just take one part of it and forget about the others.
I have no reason to believe that Ash Regan or Tonia Antoniazzi will get what they want. There is someone else who seems to be getting what they want though. Police in Bristol have been issuing 'community protection warnings' to men who they think are committing anti-social behaviour. This restricts the areas where he can go and he could face criminal action if he continues to go into them.
According to this newspaper article, they are saying they want to implement the Nordic model. There are some good things about what they are doing but they don't have the right to decide that 'anti-social' means anything that they choose it to mean. Especially when they don't have proof of what they allege.
It is for Parliament to decide if Britain adopts the Nordic model or some aspects of it. Parliament hasn't voted for the Nordic model and it seems that after the review of Nordic model law published recently they are even less likely to accept it. We can't have police forces adopting aspects of the Nordic model haphazardly.
