Home Secretary Jacqui Smith's recent speech to the Women's
Institute (WI), encouraging members to join the fight
against trafficking women into the UK sex trade, was bound
to hit the headlines.
Enlisting the efforts of a bastion of British womanhood
(the WI has more than 200,000 members in the UK) against
the latest incarnation of what is generally regarded as the
world's oldest profession was always going to excite the
media. Even if, as in this case, the target was actually
part of the media, in the shape of newspaper classified
advertising offering thinly-veiled sexual services.
But while Ms Smith's rallying call was accepted
enthusiastically by the WI, undoubtedly helping to raise
awareness of those who are coerced into prostitution, the
Government's overall strategy against the sex trade is not
quite so straightforward, and has not won support from all
quarters.
Concerns have been voiced over the real level of commitment
to tackling trafficking, the proportion of prostitutes who
are actually victims of trafficking, and whether the
emphasis on targeting street prostitution and brothels (as
opposed to decriminalisation or even legalisation) is
actually counter-productive.
The Home Secretary's speech came just days after the
publication of the Government's six-month review of the sex
trade, Tackling the demand for prostitution.
Alongside the report's more general proposals on
campaigning against sexual exploitation and trafficking,
and new powers on closing premises linked to prostitution,
two recommendations stand out.
The first, to remove the need for a persistent nuisance
before someone can be charged with kerb-crawling, brings
the law in England and Wales into line with that in
Scotland, and is unlikely to generate much controversy.
However, the second recommendation, which will make it an
offence for anyone to pay for sex with someone "controlled
for another person's gain", is much more controversial,
particularly as it will be a strict liability offence - so
ignorance of the fact that a prostitute has a pimp or has
been trafficked into the country will be no defence.
The proposed change in legislation reflects the
Government's own thinking on tackling prostitution and the
sex trade. It has moved away from the more radical
proposals of licensed brothels and 'legalised zones', to a
greater focus on those who control the sex trade or buy
into it, rather than those who are supplying it. Speaking
after the publication of the report, Ms Smith said that the
Government had not favoured an outright ban on paying for
sex (the act of prostitution itself is still not illegal)
because there was little support for such a move,
preferring instead to focus on reducing demand for
trafficked women.
"I want to do everything we can to protect the thousands of
vulnerable women coerced, exploited or trafficked into
prostitution in our country, and to bring those who take
advantage of them to justice," said the Home Secretary.
"That is why I am determined to shift the focus onto the
sex buyer, the person responsible for creating the demand
for prostitution markets, which in turn creates demand for
the vile trade of women being trafficked for sexual
exploitation."
The proposals have been backed by ACPO, whose lead on
prostitution, Gloucester Chief Constable Dr Tim Brain,
said: "Any man who intends to pay for sex with a prostitute
will have to think very carefully, because it will be no
defence in future to claim that they did not know someone
was trafficked or controlled by someone else for gain."
But not everyone is convinced that the change in
legislation is the right way forward, and others question
both the level of people trafficking in the sex trade, and
extent of the Government's commitment to tackling
trafficking. Niki Adams, a spokeswoman for the English
Collective of Prostitutes, believes the Government's claims
about the amount of trafficked women involved in
prostitution are unreliable, and argues that the
legislation will actually make things more dangerous for
prostitutes.
Speaking recently on the BBC's Today programme, she said:
"Most women in prostitution are not working for pimps, and
most are not trafficked. The figures that the Government
peddles are completely fabricated. "'Control for someone
else's gain' is a very wide definition, and could apply to
many women working in the sex industry.
The controlling legislation doesn't require force or
coercion to be proved, it just requires money to change
hands. "With this legislation, and the proposals on
kerb-crawling, it means that women are going to end up
taking more risks to earn money. If you clamp down on
clients this way, it will push women into working
underground, and make things more dangerous."
Certainly, it's difficult to estimate the actual level of
trafficking in relation to prostitution. The Government's
own figures suggest that there are around 80,000 people
working in prostitution in the UK, while the most recent
analysis by the Home Office estimated that up to 4,000
women in the UK had been trafficked for sexual exploitation.
This analysis dates from 2003, and there has undoubtedly
been significant growth in people trafficking since then.
But even if that figure had doubled over the past five
years, it would suggest that around 10 per cent of those
involved in prostitution are also victims of people
trafficking - a figure which seems to be closer to the
estimates of the English Collective of Prostitutes.
Nevertheless, it's also clear that anything which can be
done to eliminate people-trafficking should be applauded,
and the success of the two national police initiatives -
Operation Pentameter 1 and 2 - targeting people trafficking
was widely lauded by the Government. This made the
announcement in November that the Met Police's Human
Trafficking Team - Britain's largest dedicated human
trafficking unit - is to close this year because of a lack
of funding even more puzzling. The team was established in
March 2007, and while the Home Office has maintained that
the funding for the unit was always going to be time
limited, the reduction in yearly funding for human
trafficking investigations from £4m to £1.7m
means the unit will close in April 2009.
The announcement prompted strong responses from politicians
and campaigners alike, with a spokesman from pressure group
Stop The Traffik describing the decision as "unfathomable".
Liberal Democrat Home Affairs spokesman Chris Huhne said
the decision to close the unit was "terribly sad and
foolish". "This is going to leave a gaping hole in
investigating crimes that cause untold hardship to many
thousands of people," he added. "Just as the unit was
beginning to have real successes, the Home Office has
pulled the rug out from under it." It could be a decision
that comes back to haunt the Home Office, as the proposals
on prostitution, which are based in no small measure on the
Government's desire to target people trafficking, are now
in the Policing and Crime Bill announced in the Queen's
Speech at the beginning of December.
With both the Liberal Democrats and the Conservatives
likely to oppose the proposals on prostitution within the
Bill, it seems that how we police the sex trade could
become one of the political battle grounds over the coming
parliamentary sessions.
----------------------------------------------------
Police Oracle is the leading independent policing website
in the UK, carrying police-related news, police jobs and
police kit and equipment. It can be found at
http://www.policeoracle.com
EasyPublish this article: http://submityourarticle.com/articles/easypublish.php?art_id=48959
0 comments
Post a Comment