HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Subject Index
House of Assembly - Fifty-Second Parliament, Second Session (52-2)
2012-10-18 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

STATUTES AMENDMENT (SEX WORK REFORM) BILL

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading.

(Continued from 5 September 2012.)

Dr CLOSE (Port Adelaide) (10:42): I am not comfortable with the sex industry existing, and if I could wish it away I would, but I know that that is impossible. I do not want any person to feel that they have no option but to work in that industry. A big part of my motivation for being in parliament is to support vulnerable and disadvantaged children to be given the support and education that will give them a wide range of opportunities for a successful life.

However, I accept that the sex industry does and will continue to exist, in which case my overriding concern must be for the health and safety of the workers within it. I have considered this issue deeply and supporting the bill brought forward by the Hon. Steph Key is the only way in which that can be done.

There are members of this community, indeed of this house, who claim that the bill actively works to undermine the status of women in the community by supporting the sex industry. Those opposed claim people engaged in the sex industry are abused and exploited. I say that not addressing the matters is, in fact, making them worse.

Consider the following: people in the sex industry—men and women—are subject to a range of marginalised processes by parts of our community. It is not my intent to explore here today why individuals enter that industry, although I do wish to always work to provide alternative options for children as they grow up and consider their life chances. Those issues have recently been canvassed by other members; however, it is clear that, by defining the industry as 'work', we can provide some occupational health and safety measures that cannot always be assured at present.

This bill seeks to decriminalise the sex industry by allowing it to operate under a legislative model and to permit it, provided it is conducted in accordance with that legislation and its regulations. By providing a way to manage the industry and by bringing it under a legal framework, we enhance the situation in which such workers are found and, at the same time, we minimise the potential activities of those individuals or activities that are not supported.

Through decriminalisation, laws that prohibit, criminalise or restrict the act of prostitution are repealed so that sex work is seen as equivalent to all other work; that is, we recognise that sex work has been and continues to be an inevitable part of our society. The objectives of specific regulation are to minimise the harm for those involved in the industry. It is time that the sex industry should be treated as conventional employment and subject to conventional employment and health regulations. Those involved in the industry would thereby have the same rights and responsibilities as other workers.

The sex industry workers argue that this type of model provides the best for their needs as it removes the ongoing stigma of prostitution and, therefore, subsequent discrimination, and it allows workers to have access to the right protections that are held by other workers in legitimate employment. Recognising the sex industry as legitimate in its employment status allows sex workers to enter into legally binding employment contracts, a fundamental expectation of most in the Australian workforce but to date denied to those in the sex industry.

When prostitution is constructed as a criminal act it prevents the workers from reporting crimes and violence committed against them. The criminal nature of illegal prostitution has in other states been reported to be the target of harassing those regulating, including police, and therefore establishing a distrust of the regulators. Currently, sex workers are not protected. Worse, once convicted, South Australian sex workers are apparently discriminated against and marginalised for a very long period.

Members of this house have been advised that the spent conviction provisions of the Spent Convictions Act 2009 are not applied uniformly. Individuals have reported that they have been surprised that, on seeking a police check for a number of purposes, their transgressions have not been expunged and many subsequent opportunities afforded most of the community are denied, despite industrious and diligent endeavours to deliver a model citizen's life in the interim. This in itself reinforces the trap.

Why must a woman, convicted because of her naiveté, in her late teens, in taking a receptionist position in a health studio that provides massages, continue to pay for that decades later? It is not unusual for women in such circumstances to be denied opportunities for long-term permanent employment or, indeed, a credit rating of any sort. Those in the community who are opposed to the sex industry say that sex workers should just get out and move into some other form of employment. How can that happen when they are faced with sustained systemic discrimination and marginalisation?

Recent New Zealand reforms have decriminalised the sex industry. I wish to advise the house that New Zealand's long, white cloud has not fallen in as a result and neither has their sky. Importantly, this discrimination has not led to an increase in the number of sex workers operating in New Zealand. The South Australian bill does not allow sex work businesses to operate within 200 metres of schools, childcare centres and all churches, and I understand that in the Adelaide CBD this restriction is tightened to 500 metres.

New South Wales has decriminalised the sex industry. Since 1995, New South Wales' brothels are able to operate like any other business. Victoria also controls it sex industry through a combination of planning processes and a licensing system. In my view, albeit with my reservations about the industry itself, it is high time for South Australia to move away from an archaic criminalised system and to take a more liberal approach to ensuring greater protection and inclusive community standing for the workers involved in it.

Debate adjourned on motion of Mr Sibbons.

PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS
MEMBERS
GET INVOLVED
ABOUT PARLIAMENT
VISIT
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
CONTACT