Jump to content

Tilting at Windmills

  • entries
    3
  • comments
    11
  • views
    2,617

First part of my submission


Oldandbald

1,091 views

In this thread, Holly posted about the Review of Regulations of Brothels in NSW that was happening and pointed us to the discussion paper which asked for submissions. So I thought I would at least try to out up a submission. Not that I hold out much hope of success ... other far more authoritative sources have also told the Government that "tougher" regulation won't work. So here is the first part, basically a summary. I will be posting other parts, mostly dealing with the specific questions raised in the discussion paper in the next couple of days.

 

Comments welcome.

 

 

I write this submission as a frequent and long term client of the paid sex industry. I have been visiting brothels for over 20 years - since before any were legal. During this time I have made something in excess of 1,000 visits to approximately 70 brothels and "massage" parlours. However, due to the stigma and prejudices that are still attached to the industry, I will make this submission under the pseudonym EvilGenius.

 

While I do not speak from a legal or academic background, I think it is fair to claim that I speak from a position of significant experience of the industry - at least from the perspective of a client. I can also only speak from personal experience and on the basis of information that is already in the public domain.

 

Summary:

 

I will first address the objectives of the review. I will then provide some detail in response to the specific questions raised in the Discussion Paper.

 

Protection of residential amenity:

 

The discussion paper itself presents the results of a survey (Section 5.1 pages 29 and 30) that shows that against most of the types of impact, less than 10% of people report a negative impact. The exceptions are Antisocial behaviour (13%), "state of the neighbourhood" (10.3%), the ubiquitous Parking and Traffic (12.1%) and noise (12.5%). Interestingly only (8.5%) find a negative impact on Morality.

 

Superficially, this shows that sex service premises have only a minor impact on residential amenity - but the information presented in the discussion paper does not permit comparison with the relative impact compared to other types of businesses (such as fast food outlets, licensed premises, restaurants and the like). I think these other businesses would have a much greater impact on residential amenity. It is also not clear whether the "Antisocial behaviour or the "noise" is due solely to the presence of the brothel. For my own part, drawing attention to myself as I visit a brothel is the last thing I want.

 

Also the majority of brothels, both approved and unapproved seem to be in commercial or shopping precincts or in industrial areas.

 

Protection of sex workers:

 

Sex workers, like any other workers should be safe in their work. As the law stands, any sex worker in any establishment (whether approved or not) or a worker on the street can report crimes or other problems without fear of retribution. This might not be the case under a licensing system, where some establishments or workers continue to operate without licenses. There are a significant number of unlicensed establishments operating in Victoria and in Queensland despite the legislation in those states. The LASH Report from the Kirby Institute states that sex workers have better access to occupational health and safety and outreach services under the decriminalized system in NSW that under the regulated system in Victoria.

 

Section 4.2 of the discussion paper clearly states:

 

"A corollary of having sufficient protections for sex workers is that they should feel empowered to undertake actions that assist with or enhance their protection, ..."

 

If any change to legislation removes that "empowerment" for any worker, than it would have failed to meet this objective.

 

Safeguarding public health:

 

I think there is sufficient evidence in the LASH report and other reports from the Kirby Institute (and presented in this Discussion Paper) to show that the incidence of STIs in workers (and by extension clients) is as low as, or lower than the general community. These reports also show that the incidence in NSW is the same or lower than in the much more regulated industry in Victoria.

 

By way of comparison, the SHANTUSI Report from RHeD in Victoria showed the difficulty in even getting testing done in the unlicensed section of the industry:

 

"Migrant sex workers

• No migrant participants admitted to providing sexual services. Consequently, these participants argued that saliva testing was not relevant and no swabs were collected from this population."

 

The reluctance of this section of the industry to participate can be attributed to the fear of prosecution for operating or working without a license with the consequent fines or the possibility of prison for the operator.

 

In short, the Legislation we have in NSW seems to be working relatively well, but more importantly, I don't see any evidence (so far) that any of the alternative proposals have delivered demonstrably better results in terms of the stated objectives in other jurisdictions.

9 Comments


Recommended Comments

Well done, may I suggest a less glib pseudonym.

 

I read the LASH Report and thought it was an excellent review of the Sex Worker Industry in NSW.

 

I am unimpressed that the Liberal government wants to take NSW backwards to the behind the times Victorian model.

Link to comment
HollyInGriffith

Posted

Awesome stuff so far!! Love it!

Cant wait to see the rest xxx

Link to comment

I agree with Charlie's first comment. Call yourself "Ordinary middle-aged man" or something like that. Calling yourself Evil Genius makes you sound like a bad guy.

Link to comment

Well done O&B...... From the industry THANKS!!

 

I have just this minute finished my submission. I'll re-read it tonight, decide whether to send the appendix as I don't want the appendix to invalidate my submission. I'll convert to pdf tonight, ring Scarlett Alliance in the morning and get their view on the appendix!! If the appemdix is iffy and no one can advise whether it would invalidate the submission I'll send two submissions one with and one without!!

 

WOW.....it has taken much longer than I anticipated. I have slaved on it now since I was talking with Holly over a week ago. My GF (working gal too) has made many comments along the lines of WTF are U doing at 3 in the morning .... what about me!! Sorry sweetheart I have a deadline to meet which can't be missed. I'd kick myself forever if I didn't submit.

 

Holly......I have approached my submission form an owner/manager and is heavily focused in that direction. I have, though, made it quiet clear to back off and leave the sex workers out of the equation.

 

Well here's all the best and let's see how it pans out!!

Link to comment

Thanks for the comments and kind words, all.

 

Charlie and Jackson, you are right. The tag EvilGenius may work on sites like this as a bit of frivolity amongst like minded souls, but for a serious submission, something more "formal" is required. But in the eyes of some people, I am evil - simply because I visit brothels (and at times "illegal" ones as well). I will submit this under my "nom de punt" - Robert.

 

Dragon and Holly: I am writing this from a punter's perspective and the perspective of a punter at the "low end" of the market, so feel free to correct me if I say anything you or your colleagues disagree with. This could be important when I write in more detail about my thoughts on the safety of ladies, or my thoughts on the approval process for places. I will try not to write too much rubbish about stuff I have no experience in.

Link to comment

O&B.

 

It doesn't matter at what level you are coming from it all counts.

 

I have gone all out at councils - the fact is the root cause is that they have had 17 years to implement and get right. Planning is where the whole thing has fallen off the rails. There is finger pointing at both sides from State to Council and the reverse. The state needs to take sex service premises planning and consent from councils. At least give the industry a level playing field with an un-biased assessment devoid of peer pressure and moral judgement!! While I don;t consider a brothel DA complex it is onerous, time consuming, long winded and very frustrating. I'm actually preparing for another DA now for major modifications to an existing brothel. Unfortunately this submission has come at the wrong time for me. I needed to down tools and literally spend the last week writting my submission. I haven't even tried to cover all bases as that would take forever and what I don't cover will be picked up by someone else .... hopefully. There is going to be some heavy weights in the submissions as I guess councils, police the Feds via Immigration, AFP and ATO will submit something.

 

Whatever you lodge will be worth something....keep up the good work.....

Link to comment

The Dragon, I too believe that a lot of the problem is with the Councils. Some have a policy of "no brothels" and then use whatever excuses to prevent them - parking, noise and so on as a "smoke screen" for their ideological objection. In any case, obtaining a DA is a difficult process (as you say). I see this as a bigger obstacle than the proposal to licence the operators of the premises. I have said (perhaps cynically) on the forums that I thought a lot of the media coverage of brothels and particularly the "illegal" ones was to create the impression with the public that "new, tough" laws were reguired.

 

Anyhow - back to writing ...

Link to comment

Hmmm journalists ..... well they embellish the truth a lot.....and its true to say that the general publics perception more than not comes from these beat up stories.....but that's life I guess. I suspect that some of the stories have only come about because someone has pissed in their pockets!! And we all know who that is!!

I did have a shot at him in my submission but I'm sure it go over his head!!

 

Anyway I have lodged....let's see if we have any chance of swaying the outcome!!

 

I went out on a limb, was cheeky, and lodged the appendix anyway as a seperate document. Stating that if they thought it offensive they could remove it!! All it was was a set of photographs (non porno but nudity was there) illustrating my case as part of the "Content Vs Censorship" of the Victorian model regarding what WL's, brothels etc could/could not display ie photos from the shoulder up.

 

I am reasonably confident for the WL's that they won't become the pawns on the chessboard.

 

There are ways to take what is there and fix it rather than scrap it. There are ways to achieve what they seem to want without drama either at the WL or punter level.

 

If they were for instance to legislate Vs guidelines on health there would be a good case to take the legislation to court as it plainly goes against ALL of the published and might I say comissioned literature and could easily be argued on that basis. It's been done before!! Would I do it personally - Nahhhh my pockets aren't that deep, unfortunately!!

 

Of all the smoke there is only one thing that requires fixing - planning. All the other issues, excepting possibly, crime (which to me is low on my radar), all the evidence suggests are non issues and self arguing that there should be nothing done.

 

The brothels I have could really be classified as residential areas, even though I argue they aren't!! Last Christmas I had one set of local parents escort their young children to the brothel to hand out Christmas gifts!! That really bowled me over. Now if all people were like that with brothel tolerance then geez wouldn;'t things be sweet. Unfortunately there are too many do gooders who always want to stick their finger in the pie!!

Link to comment
×
×
  • Create New...