Evening
Standard Monday 2 August 2004
Plans for the biggest overhaul of
laws on prostitution for half a century have been put forward by the
government. The proposals include licensing brothels and compulsory health
checks for prostitutes. Will they really help? We put Cari Mitchell of the
English Collective of Prostitutes in the hotseat.
By ANASTASIA STEPHENS
|
How many prostitutes are there in Britain - and what percentage of them
belong to your organisation? Nobody knows how many prostitutes there are as most operate underground. There are certainly many more than the 80,000 cited in the government report. None belong to our organisation as we don't have members. It is difficult to have a membership organisation for an industry that remains criminalised. How is the Collective of Prostitutes organised - do you have regular meetings and, if so, how many women attend? We act as a network with a core group in London and branches throughout Britain. We are a fluid organisation, meeting when we need to - recently about 60 prostitutes from Soho came together to discuss what to do about the Compulsory Purchase Orders that Westminster council are issuing on the brothels there. We offer support to the women who contact us and work to highlight the issues and injustices which pervade the sex industry. Above all, we campaign to see prostitution decriminalised. |
 |
How much do prostitutes earn - and do any pay tax?
Very few women are earning thousands of pounds per day. Earnings vary
hugely. Some women earn £30 for a job - they may do a couple of jobs a
day or ten in a day. They might work every day or a few days a week
depending on how desperate they are. Many street workers say they end up
paying 80pc of their earnings in fines to the state who they say is the
biggest pimp. As for tax, we believe that if you have no civil rights, you
shouldn't have to pay tax. However many sex workers do, either because the
taxman has caught up with them or they want to play straight. Tax
inspectors often make outrageous assessments of women's earnings so that
many prostitutes end up paying an unfair rate of tax.
Having prostitution legalised and regulated can't be good news for your
members, can it - you'd all have to pay tax on your earnings?
Our main objection to legalisation isn't tax - many prostitutes already
pay - but with licensing specific brothels and official 'red light zones.'
No women wants to work in an official red-light area: you'd get put on a
police register and then your chances of getting a job outside the sex
industry are virtually zero. Police aren't interested in protecting sex
workers from violence and harrassment - they positively turn a blind eye.
This policy would force more women underground, outside official zones,
where they are even more vulnerable to violence and exploitation. Official
red light zones don't destigmatize prostitution. They are an excuse not to
decriminalise the industry.
Who's exploiting who when a man pays for sex?
Nobody is exploiting anybody. All you are doing is paying for consenting
sex. Prostitutes often get more respect from their clients than their
boyfriends or husbands.
Wouldn't the decriminalisation of prostitution give an acceptable face
for what is a wholly unacceptable activity?
Paying for sex isn't unacceptable - men have done it for thousands of
years. But keeping prostitution criminalised is unacceptable. It keeps
women vulnerable and powerless. Prostitutes face daily discrimination from
police, who very rarely pursue complaints of sexual assault or rape. Under
the current loitering and soliciting laws, a woman can be
convicted on the single word of a policeman. Magistrates automatically
rubber-stamp Antisocial Behaviour Orders, which if contravened lead to a
custodial sentence, in which a woman is sent to prison and her children
taken into care. Many children taken into care, end up on the game. If
decriminalised, sex workers would get recognition and respect in the eyes
of the law. Their issues, including assault and rape, would be taken
seriously. They'd be able to work discretely from their own premises with
established networks to help them screen out violent men.
You oppose compulsory testing for HIV among prostitutes. With the high
risk of HIV infection in the business - and the chance of passing it on -
isn't your stance highly irresponsible?
Along with health care workers, we agree that such a policy would be
discriminatory. All women, including prostitutes have access to health
screenings on the NHS. Research shows that heterosexual sex isn't the main
route of transmission for HIV. Besides, the overwhelming majority of
prostitutes use condoms. This is indicated by the fact that men will pay
up to four times the going rate for unprotected sex. Nobody, by the way,
has suggested testing men.
In your opinion, have the licensed brothels already operating in
Australia and the Netherlands been a success?
Not in the way we want. In Australia, women can work in more safety. But
the brothel owners who know women
must work on their premises, use this to their advantage. Women - who were
previously working independently - often have to pay a large percentage of
their earnings to them. Generally, the licensing of brothels is used by
police to crack down on immigrant women who have fled war-zones or are
supporting families back home. As they can't get a license, they are
forced underground and become easier targets for deportment.
Many prostitutes are illegal immigrants brought from abroad and
controlled by organised crime gangs. Aren't authorities right in thinking
it is best to trace these women and deport them, so they can be reunited
with their families?
No. Authorities are guilty of grossly exaggerating how many immigrant sex
workers are 'trafficked.' Most work independently and have come here
because they are fleeing war, famine or desperate poverty and need to
support their families. In this case, returning them from where they fled
is absolutely brutal.
Wouldn't most prostitutes leave the industry given the choice?
Yes. Single mothers often turn to prostitution because it pays better than
the average women's wage which virtually disappears after paying for
childcare. The fact that so many women, teenagers and single mums end up
trapped in prostitution is a damning reflection of our society. We need
better welfare payments and benefits, and shelters to help women escape
violent husbands. Once a woman is convicted for a charge related to
prostitution she is classified as a sex offender along with paedophiles
and rapists. After that, you have no chance of leaving the industry.
As it is men who feed the prostitution industry, isn't it about time
that they, as clients, faced the prospect of being named, shamed and fined
in court?
No. We don't want that sort of equality. If clients were criminalised,
prostitutes would be pushed further underground. We'd have to use
middlemen and women in the street would have less time to check out
clients before getting into a car. We'd be more vulnerable and face a lot
more danger.
Westminster Council says that prostitution is a bligh to the
local environment and quality of life for
people in the area. Given that prostitution attracts drugs, organised
crime and encourages sexual promiscuity, wouldn't you agree?
Absolutely not. The police exaggerate the link between prostitution and
organised crime. Many prostitutes are
not drug users and most don't have a pimp. Sex workers are decent women
who work in the industry because they have to. According to government,
74pc of women are in prostitution to support their family.
Given that prostitution involves the serious exploitation of adults and
the abuse of children, can it ever be 'cleaned up'?
The only way to clean up prostitution is through decriminalisation. Women
must also have access to resources that would prevent them from going on
the game. These would include better benefits, refuges from violent homes,
and rehabilitation for drug addicts.
Don't Westminster council have a valid argument in issuing compulsory
purchase orders on Soho brothels to turn them into desperately needed
housing for the homeless?
A public enquiry into the Compulsory Purchase Order made on a brothel in
Peter Street exposed the fact that the council had not offered it to the
Housing Association for social housing at all. It was very likely they
were going to offer it to property developers. Women have worked in
brothels in Soho for generations: a good network has been established
making it one of the safest places to work. Women driven out by the
council, end up in new areas, away from regular clients. Violent men know
this. A prostitute driven out of Soho, was recently found murdered.
How would you tackle the problem of underage prostitution?
Some years ago, a group of kids from the Children's Society went to the
health minister asking for more refuges for those wanting to escape from
violent homes or prostitution. They were too busy to be met. This attitude
needs to stop. We need more refuges as well as a minimum wage and welfare
benefits for under-18s. They might then have a better chance of escaping
violent homes without ending up on the streets or in prostitution.