HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Member Index
Legislative Council - Fifty-Fourth Parliament, Second Session (54-2)
2021-02-03 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

Bills

Statutes Amendment (Repeal of Sex Work Offences) Bill

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading.

(Continued from 18 June 2020.)

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN (17:56): I rise to speak against this bill. We have already dealt with a very similar bill in this term of parliament. It was defeated in the other place, yet here we have it back again with very few changes. I think we should vote this bill down if for no other reason than it has already been dealt with to a large extent. I will be voting against it for that reason as well as because it is simply a bad bill.

However, if it passes the second reading today on the understanding that it will be sent to a select committee, I will not oppose the select committee and, indeed, I will seek to be a member of that committee. Nevertheless, there will be a second reading vote on the bill that is before us, so we owe it to the women exploited through prostitution, the women who are sexually abused on a daily basis, to make some comments on it.

This bill will decriminalise pimps and brothel owners. It will therefore increase their power and ability to exploit vulnerable women. It will also continue the existing situation where sex buyers are largely invisible in terms of prostitution law. In this place and the other, as well as in the community, we have spoken about the scourge of sexual violence, that women are still not equal in our society and that they still do not receive equal respect. Indeed, Minister Lensink in this place yesterday said:

We were quite concerned that the messages needed to be getting through that all forms of violence are completely unacceptable, so we developed an advertising campaign, which is called 'See it for what it is. Stop Sexual Violence.'

She went on:

… we do know from the research that there are some pervasive views which continue in our communities…in terms of just letting people know that sexual violence is unacceptable both for the perpetrator and for the potential victims…

Yet, it is such pervasive attitudes that would be supported and enabled by this bill. Attitudes that are pervasive and that contribute to sexual violence in general include partners saying, 'I am supporting you financially, so you owe me sex,' or at the end of a date, 'I've spent money on you, so you owe me sex,' or the simple entitled attitude, 'I have a right to sex.'

Dr Caroline Norma PhD is a member of the Coalition Against Trafficking in Women Australia. She is also the author of The Japanese comfort women and sexual slavery during the China and Pacific wars among other publications. Dr Norma co-authored a book about prostitution and in the introductory chapter, 'Prostitution survivors speak out,' she said:

[The book] presents powerful stories by women who have survived the prostitution industry. The testimonies collated…bear witness to the effects of prostitution on women and girls, and bring to life its dismal statistics.

She says such stories are rarely published. Instead, it is the profiteers who are most dominant and influential in speaking and writing about prostitution. This billion dollar industry seeks to persuade the world that prostitution is a service like any other that allows women to earn vast sums of money and to travel and enjoy life's luxuries. In large sections of the media, academia, public policy and the law, the sex industry has had its way. With money no obstacle, its polished representatives repeat the mantra 'Sex work is work, prostitution is a job like any other and the sex industry should be treated as just another business enterprise.' She continues:

Prostitution is euphemistically described as 'compensated dating' and 'assisted intercourse' with women who are 'erotic entrepreneurs'. But the sex industry's public relations campaign makes little mention of the damage, violation, suffering and torment of prostitution on the body and the mind nor of the deaths, suicides and murders that are common. It is in its economic interest to do so.

Melissa Farley, in 'Prostitution, trafficking and cultural amnesia: what we must not know in order to keep the business of sexual exploitation running smoothly', which is an article published in the Yale Journal of Law and Feminism, observes:

Much of the business must be concealed and denied in order for it to continue. There is an economic motive to hiding the violence in prostitution and trafficking. Prostitution is sexual violence that results in massive economic profit for some of its perpetrators. The information on the harms of prostitution, pornography and trafficking has to be culturally, psychologically and legally denied, because to know it would interfere with the business of sexual exploitation.

The book authors continue:

In critiquing the business of sexual exploitation, the accounts in this book sit outside the sphere of mainstream publishing in exposing the prostitution trade for what it is: violence against women.

We often hear claims that violence decreases in a decriminalised environment. Yet, the following are among the findings of the New Zealand Prostitution Law Review Committee. It found that violence in prostitution continued after prostitution was decriminalised in New Zealand. It stated:

The majority of sex workers felt that the law could do little about violence that occurred.

35% reported that they had been coerced to prostitute with a given john in the past 12 months.

A majority of respondents felt that decriminalization made no difference with respect to the violence of johns in prostitution—they felt that it was inevitably a part of the sex industry.

The Report notes that 'few' sex workers, regardless of whether they were prostituting indoors or outdoors, reported any of the incidents of violence or crimes against them…

I will quote Dr Norma quite extensively. She says:

Acts of prostitution themselves cause the most psychological and physical harm to people in the sex industry, and are experienced as instances of paid rape. The women must therefore self-medicate, use drugs and stay inebriated to cope with the constant sexual violation. The harm and violence that pimps and sex industry customers inflict on women is additional to this.

She rebuts a number of myths, such as that it is the laws against prostitution that actually cause stigma. She explains:

Women in the sex industry are inherently stigmatised because their sexual violation and humiliation is what is being traded. Pornographic sex with disposable women is exactly what customers are paying for, and the intrinsic aspect of prostitution inevitably stigmatises women, and can't be avoided except to shut down the industry.

She continues:

Decriminalising the activities of pimps and customers strengthens their power over prostituted women, because they are empowered by government sanction and public acceptance in their exploitation.

She rebuts the myth in regard to prostitution being about a woman having a right to use her body as she chooses. She says:

Yes, but men do not have a right to use the bodies of others as they choose. Prostitution is not the autonomous exercise of bodies by women, but in fact the sexual use of other people's bodies by men.

Any law that says that women can be bought is damaging to every woman in our community. It undermines our struggle for equality, it normalises violence against women instead of working to overcome, decrease and eliminate violence against women. It tells men that they have a right to sexual access to women, so long as they can pay of course, and that affects the status of all women. It turns us into products, it dehumanises us, it says we can be sexually exploited for the pleasure and gratification of men.

This is terrible for the status of all women in society. It legitimises the sexual subordination of women in society, ending the possibility of gender equality. It also funnels those who are already socially vulnerable into prostitution because it reframes prostitution to gloss over its damage and its degradation, and it agitates for the wholesale decriminalisation of sexual and financial exploiters, such as brothel keepers, the punters and the pimps.

Men who frequent prostitutes have a sense of entitlement. They feel entitled to abuse and use any woman wherever they want. They have paid after all and if they can pay for one woman why can they not use another woman for whom they have not paid? It comes back to those pervasive attitudes of some men that 'I have a right to sex.'

Women in prostitution report that sexual harassment is part of the trade, being raped is part of the trade, being treated as totally worthless except as an orifice for men's sexual gratification is part of the trade. Decriminalisation does not change any of that, which is why I oppose this current bill.

The Hon. I. PNEVMATIKOS (18:06): I will keep my remarks brief today as I am sure everyone in the chamber is well aware of my position. This will be the 14th bill before the parliament to change laws on sex work in South Australia. In my eyes, that is 13 bills too many. However, we persevere and I once again thank the Hon. Tammy Franks MLC for bringing this bill to the council. I have spoken at length on this issue during the Statutes Amendment (Decriminalisation of Sex Work) Bill 2018.

The crux of the issue for me is that sex workers deserve the same rights as any other worker. Some do not see decriminalisation as the way to do that, so this committee that is to be established is essential for them. For those who still refuse to put sex workers in charge of their own lives—often women, I might add—and recognise their own autonomy to make the decisions, the establishment of this committee will be for you.

I can guarantee that we will hear the same evidence, the same stories, and come to the same conclusion that decriminalisation is the best model, but if that is what it is going to take, I am prepared to do that. I will be supporting this bill and fighting for all people of South Australia to be equal, and that includes sex workers. Decriminalisation is supported by the community, it is supported by the research, so it is about time it was supported by this parliament.

The Hon. C. BONAROS (18:08): I rise to speak very briefly on the Statutes Amendment (Repeal of Sex Work Offences) Bill 2020 and I note for the record, given the nature of the bill, SA-Best, as with other parties, has determined that the broader issue will be a conscience matter for the party. That being said, my colleague and I are both supportive of the matter being referred to a select committee for inquiry. As has been mentioned, this is certainly not the first time that we have done this; in fact, it is the 14th time.

I do not intend to unpack the issues in any detail today. What I will do briefly is acknowledge the good number of past members championing this cause. As I have said on the record previously in relation to other conscience vote debates, and will continue to say, I do not believe it is my place to judge others and their choices. Legislation needs to be premised on a solid evidence-based foundation rather than on any personal, ideological, moral or religious beliefs. It also needs to be considered in the context of the overwhelming majority of voices of the community.

In this instance, a select committee is well placed to inquire into this. I look forward to its recommendations and their implementation because I think we can all agree that this type of work will not miraculously disappear from our communities. With those brief words, I indicate our support for the bill's referral to a select committee.

Members interjecting:

The PRESIDENT: Order! Those who are congratulating the member on being concise are delaying the debate.

The Hon. N.J. CENTOFANTI (18:09): I rise to indicate that I will not be supporting the Statutes Amendment (Repeal of Sex Work Offences) Bill for several reasons, and I will be voting against this bill at the third reading.

However, I would like to indicate that I am happy to support its referral to a select committee of this chamber to look into the policing of the sex work industry in this state. I would hope that the terms of reference of this committee would include investigating a variety of models of reform, including legalisation, decriminalisation and the Nordic model.

I would like to acknowledge the mover of the bill, the Hon. Ms Tammy Franks, and those who have moved similar, if not identical, bills in both this place and the other place. I think we are all here for similar reasons: first and foremost to improve the safety and wellbeing of those in prostitution. We are simply debating the method with which to do so.

With this, I believe this current bill will not give these women the protection they so deeply desire and deserve. In saying 'women', I also acknowledge that it is not just women. However, for the sake of this contribution I will refer to women, given they make up the overwhelming majority of the sex industry.

I also acknowledge that there are no quick fixes when it comes to protecting those who are most vulnerable in our society. Not all women in prostitution are vulnerable. I realise and acknowledge this. However, we do know that many vulnerable women enter prostitution due to reasons such as extreme poverty, lack of opportunity and drug addiction, to name a few.

Let's be honest, brothels are predominantly cash businesses. The vast majority of clients do not want to leave an electronic payment record of their visit. In an era where cash use is declining and cash businesses are becoming not only a premium find but increasingly scarce, for illegal enterprises brothels provide the perfect opportunity for money laundering for drug traffickers and other gang-related criminal activity.

An example of this can be seen in Sydney in 2018, well after the passing of a similar bill that we are debating here today decriminalising prostitution. A young man was arrested after $1 million was seized from a sports bag hidden in the boot of his car after making daily trips to Sydney from Melbourne to visit Sydney brothels to recruit young women who could assist him in laundering money.

Even more recently, a man from Western Australia was arrested no less than a month ago when police found $95,000 cash and $10,000 worth of gift cards in the back of his Mercedes-Benz. Through this arrest, 10 sex workers have been referred to Australian Border Force as part of an ongoing investigation into an international money laundering scandal. The investigation has since established links between residential brothels in Western Australia and an Asian crime network, which is allegedly involved with sex workers from Thailand and China after information received from the ANZ bank regarding suspicious transactions.

I realise that the Western Australian government has not decriminalised prostitution. However, according to Australia's number one online brothel platform, Veneev, where you can find, rate and review Australia's best brothels on an unsecured platform, the website states:

Unlike Melbourne and Sydney, brothels in Western Australia are illegal. In saying that, the government and the business owners have an unofficial agreement in which brothels are tolerated. Great news for the local punters.

It then goes on to list all the brothels in Perth. I would like to quote Detective Sergeant Matt Edmunds from the Proceeds of Crime Squad about the continued investigation into the organised crime element of residential brothels in WA. He says:

The involvement of established criminal networks in the operation of residential brothels causes great concern to police. Such involvement is known to lead to other serious crimes being committed, including money laundering.

Sergeant Edmunds also adds:

While there are women who make a conscious decision to become involved in the sex industry, there are also many cases where young and/or vulnerable women are coerced into being involved, or who find it difficult to stop being involved in the industry due to the controlling nature of those involved in running the operations, particularly for workers who are in Australia on temporary visas.

In a parliamentary select committee on an earlier version of this bill, South Australia Police argued the need for regulation that both protects the workers in the industry and prevents the infiltration of organised crime. They argued that a completely unregulated environment will only lead us to problems in the future. South Australia Police also told the committee that it is often the people behind the scenes, such as outlaw motorcycle gangs, who may be a silent partner providing funds or being paid protection money.

We know that SAPOL are experts in criminal organisations and those individuals that inhabit them in our state. A decriminalised sex industry removes police as regulators of the industry and regulates brothels by the same standard industry codes that are enforced on any other industry, such as the hospitality industry. I would argue that a SafeWork SA inspector does not have available to them the same knowledge, experience and resources that SAPOL does to be able to minimise criminal gang involvement in the sex industry. Therefore, it is a real risk that completely decriminalising brothels will provide ample opportunity for money laundering and other criminal activity in our state.

Following decriminalisation, the responsibility of brothels will also largely be transferred from law enforcement to local councils. In this way, councils will be forced to dedicate funds and administration staff to manage the industry without police authority or resources to investigate, penalise or shut down brothel owners. This puts an unfair burden on a tier of government that one could argue is not best suited to the complexity of the task.

The underlying aim of this legislation is to make prostitution another form of labour, and to incorporate it into the labour market as sex work. Liberal discourses of empowerment, agency and sex positivity advance the notion that sex can be labour, and hence exchanged on a market. This makes the large assumption that women in prostitution choose to be there. In fact, coercive labour relations have been common in many markets throughout history and, while it has since been abolished in most forms, the International Labour Organization estimates there are still over 12.3 million forced workers worldwide. Others estimate that about 600,000 are trafficked each year in the sex industry alone.

As we know from the basic free-market economy 101 theory, a saturated market results in lower prices, an increase in demand and increased acceptance of the merchandise. When we apply this to the sex trade, this means more women abused in prostitution, more men paying for sex and further risk of pressure to practice unsafe sex. This mantra of free choice exists only for a select few women, and distracts from the greater work that must be done to facilitate full societal inclusion of women with the least amount of choices.

If we decriminalise prostitution, I believe this will create a pathway for some of the less legitimate brothel owners to prey on the most vulnerable women in our society. If brothels are just like any other business, no different from a restaurant, this will mean that brothel owners will be able to present themselves as doing their employees a favour by giving them a job.

I find it concerning that some relatively privileged, mostly university-educated sex workers, who feel they have made a choice to enter the industry, are being held up as representatives of all women in the sex industry and applauded when they silence the growing survivor movement, who are calling for an end to prostitution.

I refer the chamber to an excerpt from a well-known Australian porn actress, Madison Missina, who spoke out about the abuses she witnessed within the sex industry. She describes sexual harassment, exploitation and rape as just part of the job she was expected to do, and speaks about the consequences of prostitution survivors speaking out, and I quote:

I have also experienced firsthand how when a supposed 'happy hooker' speaks out about the exploitation within the current Australian Sex Industry she gets excluded, ignored if she's lucky. If she's not well it will escalate to bullying, abuse and violence. The price I've personally paid for speaking out is the exclusion from the ugly mug list (which is a list of Johns who have been violent, committed crimes against women in the industry or refused to pay); I've had my legal name, personal phone number, and home address published. I've been stalked, verbally assaulted publicly twice, been threatened with physical violence, had the locks of my front door removed, and the front door of my building smashed in.

Led by survivors, the prostitution abolitionist movement is growing. They are speaking out against the sex trade in all its forms and calling for the adoption of the Nordic model and exit programs.

Long-time Australian Indigenous abolitionist, Simone Watson, when asked about how it felt to tell her story, said:

It has definitely been empowering. Genuine empowerment. It gives me hope. I'd like to believe I'm opening people's eyes to what is really going on. I'd like to believe I'm maybe giving some women still in the industry…maybe I'm getting through to some of them that there is life after this, you can get out and start changing things and bringing some light into your life. Some days it's hard because it can start bringing some of the trauma back. Overall it has been a really positive experience despite anyone trying to silence me. It just fuels my fire and my passion to speak out more.

Finally, I will speak about Sabrinna Valisce, who was a prostitute in support of decriminalisation in New Zealand until she experienced what a decriminalised industry looked like. She now argues that men who use prostitutes should be prosecuted. After her father suicided when Sabrinna was 12 years old, it changed her life completely. Within two years, her mother remarried and moved the family from Australia to New Zealand, where her stepfather was violent and she felt very isolated and alone. Within months, she ran away and found herself on the streets selling sex to survive.

In 1989, after two years working on the streets, Sabrinna visited the New Zealand Prostitutes Collective in Christchurch. She said, 'I was looking for some support, perhaps to exit prostitution, but all I was offered was condoms.' She was also invited to the collective's regular weekly social nights. She remembered that they started talking about how stigma against sex workers was the worst thing about it, and that prostitution is just like any other job. To her, it somehow made what she was doing more palatable. She became the collective's massage parlour coordinator and an enthusiastic supporter of its campaign for the full decriminalisation of all aspects of the sex trade. She said:

It felt like there was a revolution coming. I was so excited about how decriminalisation would make things better for the women.

However, decriminalisation arrived in 2003 and she soon became disillusioned. The Prostitution Reform Act allowed brothels to operate as legitimate businesses, a model often hailed as the safest option for women in the sex trade. But Sabrinna said that in New Zealand it was a disaster and only benefited the pimps and punters. One problem was that it allowed brothel owners to offer punters an all-exclusive deal whereby they would pay a set amount to do anything they wanted with a woman. Sabrinna stated:

I thought it would give more power and rights to the women. But I soon realised the opposite was true. One thing we were promised would not happen was the 'all-inclusive' because that would mean the women wouldn't be able to set the price or determine which sexual services they offered or refused—which was the mainstay of decriminalisation and its supposed benefits.

There are countless stories about the abuse and hardship that women face within the industry. In the #MeToo era, where sexual harassment, sexual objectification and gender inequality are being called out everywhere, it beggars belief that it is not called out in prostitution. We cannot abandon the majority of women in the sex industry who would leave if they could.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK (Minister for Human Services) (18:23): I rise to indicate that the Liberal Party will be supporting the referral of this particular bill to a joint select committee. My views on this issue are very well known because of the number of speeches I have given and, having chaired the previous committee in the last parliament, it is a subject that I am well versed in. So I do not intend to speak at any length at all, only to say that I believe a lot of people would be in agreement that the current laws are difficult to police and certainly do not serve their particular purpose and are quite out of date.

I would like to address some of the references that the Hon. Ms Scriven made in relation to my comments about a particular campaign yesterday in question time because I believe that those comments were really pointing out that consent is important. Consent is important in this issue as well, and it is my firm belief that consent between mutually consenting parties—I have not structured that very neatly—is important and that therefore decriminalisation would be a useful way forward. With those comments, I commend the bill.

The Hon. T.A. FRANKS (18:24): I thank those members who have made a contribution this evening and also those who are willing to serve on the select committee looking at this matter. This is actually quite a different bill from the last one I moved in this council which did, indeed, get the support of this council. It actually goes to the nub of the matter. It asks whether or not the criminal offences we currently have in our statutes are serving a useful purpose or whether they are actually bad laws, because I do not think it is the workers in this industry who are bad, I think it is the laws that fail them and fail us as a society.

I note that since we last debated decriminalisation in this place it has been embraced by the Labor Northern Territory government. It has also seen a referral by the Victorian Andrews government, led by Fiona Patten MLC, to look at decriminalisation in that state as well, and I understand the Queensland government has also made pledges to look at decriminalisation. So at least in the Northern Territory, as well as Victoria, we have a lot we can learn from their recent law reforms, as well as New South Wales and New Zealand, of course.

The support for decriminalisation by groups such as the World Health Organization, Amnesty International, UNAIDS, and the various reputable international groups against trafficking should not go unnoted. Indeed, I agree with the Hon. Michelle Lensink when she points to consent being the important point here. I note not all sex workers are women; they are men, they are transgender people, they are gender fluid people and, of course, they are women. Also, not all clients are men; they are women, they are transgender people, they are gender fluid people and, of course, they are women. We cannot assume—

The Hon. C.M. Scriven interjecting:

The Hon. T.A. FRANKS: You were heard in silence, Hon. Clare Scriven. It would be appreciated if you would not heckle anyone who does not agree with you. I hope this inquiry will look at the laws we currently have, because I believe they fail. I hope this inquiry will keep an open mind, and have a look at the various models of regulation that are done by police in these jurisdictions and abroad.

Sitting extended beyond 18:30 on motion of Hon. R.I. Lucas.

The Hon. T.A. FRANKS: The issue of money laundering is something that I raise in the second reading contribution to this bill because at the moment money laundering is used as a quasi charge related to the sex industry, particularly if people use credit cards as opposed to cash. Credit card use is literally criminalised under our current operating laws. So if one is concerned about money laundering, one would imagine that law reform would be something that we might seek at the present time.

I note that I will be moving the contingent notice of motion in amended form. There is a typo, so I draw members' attention to the fact that it will not be the 'Emergency Services Act' but the Emergency Management Act that is referred to. I also look forward to us hearing the voices of those involved in this industry without judgement and without moralising, that we hear from clients, that we hear from workers, that we hear from SAPOL, that we heed the advice of jurisdictions that have undertaken law reform in this area that we have a lot to learn from, and in particular that we get the statistics and the data that we need to have this debate in a way that is actually informed by truth and not by stigma and rumour.

Bill read a second time.

The Hon. T.A. FRANKS (18:31): Contingently, on the Statutes Amendment (Repeal of Sex Work Offences) Bill being read a second time, I seek leave to move contingent notice of motion No. 2 in an amended form.

Leave granted.

The Hon. T.A. FRANKS: I move:

1. That the bill be referred to a select committee of the Legislative Council for inquiry and report.

2. That standing order 389 be so far suspended as to enable the chairperson of the committee to have a deliberative vote only.

3. That, during the period of any declaration of a major emergency made under section 23 of the Emergency Management Act 2004 or any declaration of a public health emergency made under section 87 of the South Australian Public Health Act 2011, members of the committee may participate in the proceedings by way of telephone or videoconference or other electronic means and shall be deemed to be present and counted for purposes of a quorum, subject to such means of participation remaining effective and not disadvantaging any member.

4. That this council permits the select committee to authorise the disclosure or publication, as it sees fit, of any evidence or documents presented to the committee prior to such evidence being presented to the council.

5. That standing order 396 be suspended to enable strangers to be admitted when the select committee is examining witnesses unless the committee otherwise resolves, but they shall be excluded when the committee is deliberating.

Motion carried.

Referred to Select Committee

The Hon. T.A. FRANKS (18:33): I move:

That the select committee consist of the Hon. Dr Nicola Centofanti, the Hon. Irene Pnevmatikos, the Hon. Clare Scriven, the Hon. David Ridgway and the mover.

Motion carried.

The Hon. T.A. FRANKS: I move:

That the select committee have the power to send for persons, papers and records; to adjourn from place to place; and to report on Wednesday 31 March 2021.

Motion carried.

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