The Nordic model has been in place in Northern Ireland since 2015. This is supposed to criminalise men who pay for sex. Now there is a study which shows how effective it has been in reducing demand. The data shows that there has been an increase. "On the contrary, we found that the supply of commercial sexual services appears to have actually increased in the period following the implementation of the legislation." page 164
The study is called A Review of the Criminalisation of Paying for Sexual Services in Northern Ireland by Graham Ellison, Caoimhe Ní Dhónaill & Erin Early and it came out in September of this year. It shows that the Nordic model has not worked in Northern Ireland, neither has it worked in Sweden.
Other important statements from Chapter 10: Conclusions are
I have copied-and-pasted the final paragraph of the conclusion at the end of this post.
Some people will say that I don't want the Nordic model to come to Britain because I fear conviction. There have been only two convictions so far, but neither of them were men who paid for sex. Both men were said to have offered payment for sex to females who weren't prostitutes. You have to wonder what is wrong with them. Were they just trying to be offensive? Were they drunk? Did they have a psychological problem or a learning disability? I don't proposition women in the street.
There are a couple of things that I found disappointing in this report.
Firstly, I would have liked to have seen data on who is prosecuted for brothel keeping. Are they mostly male or female? Are they young or old? I think that it will be mostly young women, this seems to be the case in the Irish Republic. I suppose the study is about demand, but the Nordic model is supposed to reduce demand and stop the criminalisation of prostitutes.
"The sex worker has to fear being recorded as a prostitute in police records, possibly being prosecuted for brothel keeping, losing her accommodation, stuff around immigration and so on. Remember even EU workers can be refused entry at airport/port once they are recorded as a prostitute by police." page 154
So no man has been convicted of paying for sex. Yet women are convicted of brothel keeping, evicted and deported. So much for 'shifting the burden'. That's the Nordic model for you. They say prostitution is violence against women but they do that to women. What bastards.
Secondly, the study doesn't point out that surveys in Sweden show an increase in active sex buyers after their 1999 law, from 1.3% in 1996 to 1.8% in 2008. It really does seem that the Nordic model increases demand, and if there is a decrease later it is because of other factors, such as the 2008 financial crisis.
"It may be disappointing for proponents of this legislation that the research did not uncover more evidence of a reduction in prostitution in Northern Ireland, particularly since this was hailed as such a success in Sweden, and one of the main reasons why the Nordic model (so termed) has been exported internationally. However, we would respond by suggesting that the evidence base from Sweden and the Nordic countries generally is simply not strong enough to support the proposition that sex purchase legislation has led to the massive decreases in prostitution and human trafficking that are alleged to have occurred in those jurisdictions. We noted in the Introduction that we are not aware of any prevalence studies from the Nordic regions relating to before and after the legislation was introduced, nor are we aware of any trend analyses of administrator data from ASWs that operate in these regions which would provide a clearer indication of prevalence rates. Certainly, the evidence from Northern Ireland based on a comparison of the before and after data suggests very strongly that Article 64A has had minimal to no effect on the demand for prostitution, the number of active sex workers in the jurisdiction and on levels of human trafficking for sexual exploitation."
A new law in Northern Ireland criminalises sex work – and endangers sex workers
The study is called A Review of the Criminalisation of Paying for Sexual Services in Northern Ireland by Graham Ellison, Caoimhe Ní Dhónaill & Erin Early and it came out in September of this year. It shows that the Nordic model has not worked in Northern Ireland, neither has it worked in Sweden.
Other important statements from Chapter 10: Conclusions are
- none of the foundational claims of the Nordic model can be supported
- it is difficult to argue that Article 64A has had any noticeable effect on deterring sex workers from working or limiting their availability in the jurisdiction.
- sex-purchase legislation is not particularly effective at reducing either the supply or demand for prostitution
- there have been few arrests, prosecutions and convictions under Article 64A and the two convictions that have ensued have had nothing to do with either human trafficking for sexual exploitation or prostitution
- an increase in anti-social, nuisance and abusive behaviours directed to sex workers
- purchase legislation in Northern Ireland has not significantly altered client behaviour
- the evidence base from Sweden and the Nordic countries generally is simply not strong enough to support the proposition that sex purchase legislation has led to the massive decreases in prostitution and human trafficking that are alleged to have occurred in those jurisdictions
- Article 64A has had minimal to no effect on the demand for prostitution, the number of active sex workers in the jurisdiction and on levels of human trafficking for sexual exploitation
I have copied-and-pasted the final paragraph of the conclusion at the end of this post.
Some people will say that I don't want the Nordic model to come to Britain because I fear conviction. There have been only two convictions so far, but neither of them were men who paid for sex. Both men were said to have offered payment for sex to females who weren't prostitutes. You have to wonder what is wrong with them. Were they just trying to be offensive? Were they drunk? Did they have a psychological problem or a learning disability? I don't proposition women in the street.
There are a couple of things that I found disappointing in this report.
Firstly, I would have liked to have seen data on who is prosecuted for brothel keeping. Are they mostly male or female? Are they young or old? I think that it will be mostly young women, this seems to be the case in the Irish Republic. I suppose the study is about demand, but the Nordic model is supposed to reduce demand and stop the criminalisation of prostitutes.
"The sex worker has to fear being recorded as a prostitute in police records, possibly being prosecuted for brothel keeping, losing her accommodation, stuff around immigration and so on. Remember even EU workers can be refused entry at airport/port once they are recorded as a prostitute by police." page 154
So no man has been convicted of paying for sex. Yet women are convicted of brothel keeping, evicted and deported. So much for 'shifting the burden'. That's the Nordic model for you. They say prostitution is violence against women but they do that to women. What bastards.
Secondly, the study doesn't point out that surveys in Sweden show an increase in active sex buyers after their 1999 law, from 1.3% in 1996 to 1.8% in 2008. It really does seem that the Nordic model increases demand, and if there is a decrease later it is because of other factors, such as the 2008 financial crisis.
"It may be disappointing for proponents of this legislation that the research did not uncover more evidence of a reduction in prostitution in Northern Ireland, particularly since this was hailed as such a success in Sweden, and one of the main reasons why the Nordic model (so termed) has been exported internationally. However, we would respond by suggesting that the evidence base from Sweden and the Nordic countries generally is simply not strong enough to support the proposition that sex purchase legislation has led to the massive decreases in prostitution and human trafficking that are alleged to have occurred in those jurisdictions. We noted in the Introduction that we are not aware of any prevalence studies from the Nordic regions relating to before and after the legislation was introduced, nor are we aware of any trend analyses of administrator data from ASWs that operate in these regions which would provide a clearer indication of prevalence rates. Certainly, the evidence from Northern Ireland based on a comparison of the before and after data suggests very strongly that Article 64A has had minimal to no effect on the demand for prostitution, the number of active sex workers in the jurisdiction and on levels of human trafficking for sexual exploitation."
A new law in Northern Ireland criminalises sex work – and endangers sex workers
