SAAFE forum
General Category => Politics and academic/media queries => Topic started by: RosieBeyondtheGaze on 08 February 2016, 06:28:46 pm
-
Hi All, Some of you will have seen in the media the Home Affairs Committee are holding an inquiry . The terms of reference and questions they are considering are rather biased and include
'Whether criminal sanction in relation to prostitution should continue to fall more heavily on those who sell sex, rather than those who buy it'.
'What the implications are for prostitution-related offences of the Crown Prosecution Service's recognition of prostitution as violence against women.'
They invite submissions by 18th February 2016, both individuals and organisations can write in with their views. To learn more about how you can do that go to;
parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/home-affairs-committee/news-parliament-2015/160114-new-inquiry---prostitution
They so need to hear from people working in sex work!
-
I saw this and I'd really like to contribute to it but I don't know what format they want contributions.
I can't believe they've framed it those terms! It doesn't seem to have occurred to them that it doesn't need criminalising AT ALL.
-
Hi I know, awful loaded questions. I am involved in doing the response National Ugly Mugs is doing. It will oppose any criminalisation of customers and of course sex workers. With how to submit a response they give the following guidance sorry it's rather long but this are the guidelines they give. Think also you can submit via an online form.
'Guidelines
To successfully make a submission via the online form on a committee?s website, documents need to:
? Be less than 25 MB in size
? Be in Word (doc, docx, rtf, txt ooxml or odt format, not PDF)
? Contain as few logos or embedded pictures as possible
? Contain no macros
? Comprise a single document. If there are any annexes or appendices, these should be included in the same document.
It also assists the committee if those submitting evidence adhere to the following guidelines. Each submission should:
? State clearly who the submission is from, i.e. whether from yourself in a personal capacity or sent on behalf of an organisation, for example the submission could be headed ?Written evidence submitted by xxxxxx?
? Be concise ? we recommend no more than 3,000 words in length
? Begin with an executive summary in bullet point form of the main points made in the submission
? Include a brief introduction about yourself/your organisation and your reason for submitting evidence
? Have numbered paragraphs
? Include any factual information you have to offer from which the committee might be able to draw conclusions, or which could be put to other witnesses for their reactions
? Include any recommendations for action by the Government or others which you would like the committee to consider.
Notes on making a submission
Those making a submission to a Committee inquiry should note the following:
? Committees publish most of the written evidence they receive on the internet (where it will be accessible to search engines).
? If you do not wish your submission to be published, you must clearly say so and explain your reasons for not wishing its disclosure. The committee will take this into account in deciding whether to publish. If you wish to include private or confidential information in your submission to the committee, please contact the clerk of the committee to discuss this.
? A committee is not obliged to accept your submission as evidence, nor to publish any or all of the submission even if it has been accepted as evidence. This may occur where a submission is very long or contains material to which it is inappropriate to give parliamentary privilege (see Guide for Witnesses (PDF PDF 1.14 MB)Opens in a new window for further information on parliamentary privilege).
? Material already published elsewhere should not form the basis of a submission, but may be referred to within a submission, in which case it should be clearly referenced, preferably with a hyperlink.
? You should be careful not to comment on matters currently before a court of law, or matters in respect of which court proceedings are imminent. If you anticipate such issues arising, you should discuss with the clerk of the committee how this might affect your submission.
? Once submitted, no public use should be made of any submission prepared specifically for the committee unless you have first obtained permission from the clerk of the committee. If you are given permission by the committee to publish your evidence separately, you should be aware that you will be legally responsible for its content.
? Committees do not normally investigate individual cases of complaint or allegations of maladministration.'
-
I really want to do this but it's only 9 days and I'm not sure I have time. Will give it some thought.
Thanks Rosie.
-
This is not good. The government failed to bring in the criminalization of clients via the back door with the Modern Slavery Act, now it seems they are looking for another platform to criminalise clients, or worse.
Someone else did tell me about this but thanks for the reminder, I will now get my ass into gear and make a submission.
-
Oh good that you'll try and get something. Always crazy deadlines make it difficult! This Inquiry is not one that has been prompted by the Home Office but this specific cross party committee.
-
I've just sent my response to this via the Parliament website - the deadline is at midday on Thursday so if anybody's struggling for ideas and would like a look then just drop me a PM with an email address and I'll send it to you if you like :). I'm pretty sure it's too big to copy into the PM box.
-
Phewey submitted! (cheers Amy). What a palava tho, I no longer have Word on this laptop since the original hard drive went, so had to put it in an email to myself, rush to the library, make a Word doc (only format allowed) and finally submit. (oh yeh and delete all the wording in the doc and resave so no one would know, since it was a public computer)
-
Great that submissions are going in! The NUM one will go in we been incorporating findings from the online survey we did last week to consult NUM members. Sex worker members took part and of course made it clear they don't think law should criminalize customers. Independent has done an article independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/british-prostitutes-warn-that-criminalising-clients-would-reduce-safety-a6877816.html
-
Folks the interim report of the Home Affairs committee has been published; its calls for soliciting & sex workers sharing premises to be decriminalised and says it is not yet convinced sex buyer law would be effective in reducing demand or improving the lives of sex workers. The inquiry continues and will look at regulation in other countries including New Zealand, Sweden Netherlands, and says will look at extent to which elements of the New Zealand model might be implemented in England & Wales. Report is available at;
parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/home-affairs-committee/news-parliament-2015/prostitution-report-published-16-17/
[link edited to make non-clickable]
-
Per the Home Affairs Committee paper on prostitution 2016/17 (third session), they have come up with the following gem under the section 'Key
Facts Bullshit'
'? Sex workers have an average of 25 clients per week paying an average of ?78 per visit.' (which would equate to 'average' earnings of ?1,950 per week).
Just curious if anyone could kindly point me in the right direction to find these elusive 25 punters a week...Feck me, 25 a week on average, no pressure there then. ;D
-
Per the Home Affairs Committee paper on prostitution 2016/17 (third session), they have come up with the following gem under the section 'Key Facts Bullshit'
'? Sex workers have an average of 25 clients per week paying an average of ?78 per visit.' (which would equate to 'average' earnings of ?1,950 per week).
Just curious if anyone could kindly point me in the right direction to find these elusive 25 punters a week...Feck me, 25 a week on average, no pressure there then. ;D
I imagine there was a heavy proportion of sauna/parlour workers there, based on both the numbers and the average cost.
-
Hi Folks, Just wanted say it's unclear what will happening with the HASC 1st stage report and whether there will be a stage two of the inquiry as originally there was meant to be. After the previous Chair Keith Vaz MP left the post after media coverage about him paying for sexual services, Yvette Cooper MP became the new Chair . The committee website lists current inquiries as the following - sex work/prostitution is not mentioned;
- Asylum accommodation
Child migrants
Policing for the future
Immigration
Hate crime and its violent consequences
Sharia councils
The work of the Home Secretary
-
It's really fucking annoying that someone who ACTUALLY HAD EXPERIENCE OF BUYING SEX was basically bullied off this project :(
-
Unsurprisingly....., the party would not want to alienate male voters, would they? The voters won't be happy to have their favourite hobbies banned whilst they already pay loads of tax and tax may be rising. Buying sex is a well-favoured recreational activity to lots of UK men, including politicians. Someone must have said (within the party), no use of wasting tax payers money on discussing banning buying sex, British favourite past times. It's a bit like banning footballs or banning drinking. Men need sex and they enjoy it to cope with work, home life and so on. Discussing "criminalisation" is a complete joke.