Barnett Tim: Prostitution Reform Bill — In Committee 
Barnett Tim: Prostitution Reform Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:608;Page:5220] 
TIM BARNETT (NZ Labour—Christchurch Central) 
: 
 I seek leave for the remaining debate on this bill to be structured along the lines I intend to describe with the sole intention of helping to put some structure in the debate for the remaining time we debate this bill in Committee. Would the Committee like me to go through that in some detail? 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Yes. The member can then seek leave of the Committee. 
TIM BARNETT 
: This has been circulated to all members and copies are available on the Table here. We agreed right at the beginning of the Committee stage to take the debate in two stages: firstly the debate on the title which has now been concluded and secondly to then vote on the bill part by part. [ 
Interruption 
] 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: The member is giving a very important speech. He is outlining how he wishes the debate to proceed. It is important that members listen. He will seek leave of the Committee very shortly to be enable just that—so please can we have silence. 
TIM BARNETT 
: I remind members that at the beginning of the Committee stage of this bill we agreed that we would take the debate in two parts: firstly a debate on the title which has now concluded and the title has been passed; and secondly that there would be a debate on the entire remaining parts. That means that potentially we have a wide variety of issues. I have identified maybe 11 major themes in the amendments and in the bill that could all be discussed at once. It makes it very difficult for members to focus on the issues one by one. I took that problem to the Business Committee yesterday and it suggested that I attempt to seek leave at the beginning of the debate following the vote on the title in order to suggest an order in which we took the debate. This cannot absolutely tie members and cannot preclude members raising any matter at any time if they wish to but it is merely meant to be a guide in particular for the Chair of the Committee at the time. 
I have broadly ordered things in terms of the bill and they go through 12 points. First is the status of prostitution; in particular that would focus on Mr Franks’ amendments. Second are the definitions in the bill which are quite important when it comes to Mr Goff’s amendments on for example small owner-operated brothels and the definition of operators. Third is the issue of decriminalisation of clients and of prostitutes which broadly relates to the amendments from Dianne Yates and Marc Alexander. Fourth is the issue of advertisement in relation to businesses of prostitution or commercial sexual services which are partly Mr Goff’s amendments and partly amendments from Mr Copeland and Sue Bradford. Fifth there is the issue of the promotion of safer sex which is relevant in Mr Goff’s amendment that touches on that being the specific responsibility of operators. Sixth is the application of the Immigration Act to the issue of prostitution particularly the amendments from Lianne Dalziel concerning permits being issued under the Immigration Act. 
Seventh is the issue of under-18-year-olds providing sexual services. There are amendments on that in particular from Mr Franks concerning the test of reasonableness of belief that a prostitute was aged over 18 and also the production of the proof of age by the prostitute. Eighth is the issue of controls on soliciting which comprise a range of amendments from Mr Mapp. Ninth are the issues of controls on brothels and massage parlours depending on the terminology used. There are amendments on that issue in particular from Wayne Mapp and Gordon Copeland such as the retention of the Massage Parlours Act and amendments to the Crimes Act concerning brothel keeping and the size of brothels. 
Tenth we have the certification of operators which is the real core of Phil Goff’s amendments. Eleventh we have the location of businesses of prostitution and issues around the Resource Management Act. That is the other main part of Phil Goff’s amendment. Finally we have everything else in the bill—from the schedules to the existence of a review committee to coercion and so forth. Mainly those are areas where the only proposed amendments are consequential. 
I propose that it is not to absolutely impose a 12-stage debate because we will not vote on any of this until the very end of all that being discussed. I am trying to help members to work their way through what will be a series of quite complex issues. I seek leave on that basis. 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: The member has sought leave. Is there any objection to that course of action being taken? There appears to be none.