Brown Peter: Prostitution Reform Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
Brown Peter: Prostitution Reform Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
[Volume:607;Page:4456] 
PETER BROWN (Deputy Leader—NZ First) 
: 
 I would like to compliment the member who has just resumed her seat because I believe she does not believe terribly much in this bill at all and she quite misguidedly thinks that she can amend the bill with one simple clause to make it go along the lines of the Swedish model. I tell her she is absolutely misguided if she believes she can change this bill and make it something along the lines of the Swedish model. This bill needs to be scrapped and we need to start again if we are to obtain laws based on the Swedish model. My colleague Brent Catchpole has a member’s bill that does just that. 
We should scrap this bill and start again. It is a confusing bill. We need only look at the amendments and the Supplementary Order Papers to see that. We have Supplementary Order Paper 56 from Dianne Yates to base the bill on the Swedish model. That will not work. Phil Goff wants to turn what is basically a decriminalised model into a legalised model and to license operators—for very good reasons. I say again that that will not work. Wayne Mapp wants to tighten up the existing laws: to maintain the status quo but with a little bit of tightening up here and there. That again will not work. Lianne Dalziel has introduced an amendment that restricts immigrants coming into this country from getting jobs in the sex industry or promoting that industry. All in all that indicates there are not very many people in favour of the decriminalised model. We should in fact scrap this bill and start again. 
One thing is for certain: this bill does not represent the reform of the prostitution industry if I can call it an industry. The title the Prostitution Reform Bill is not apt. It is not correct. In essence Gordon Copeland from United Future probably has a better title that is more applicable to what the bill does but I will not be voting for that title either. I personally will be voting against all the amendments I have seen tonight on the Supplementary Order Papers because I think this bill has gone in totally the wrong direction and to implement some of the amendments as outlined on the Supplementary Order Papers would just confuse the issue even more. 
If this bill was to have a correct title it would be along the lines of the “Pimping Reform Bill”. This bill opens the door for wholesale pimping in the prostitution industry and the people who get involved in that sort of activity will be rubbing their hands with glee thinking about the amount of money they can earn if this bill is passed. Or it could well be titled the “Pimping Advancement Bill” or perhaps the “Prostitution Advancement Bill” because if this bill comes through the House as it is written or even with some of these amendments we will see all sorts of expansion in the prostitution industry. There will be no boundaries for anybody to control the industry. The police will have no access to brothels unless they suspect that something extraordinary is going on. There will be no control whatsoever. 
When this bill was promoted it was advocated that it would assist prostitutes with their health problems. When the Justice and Electoral Committee visited Christchurch in particular the prostitutes told us in no uncertain terms—and indeed every sex worker who came before the select committee was equally categoric about this—that there are no health problems in the sex industry. Sex workers said they get all the advice they need and they get all the equipment they need free of charge I gather from the health service. So this bill somewhat deceives people when it states that it will tidy up the health concerns in the sex industry. 
The title of this bill is not apt. This bill if it comes in will lead to all sorts of adverse activities. It will give incentives to pimps it will give incentives to people to encourage child sex and it will give incentives to people to traffic in women.