Smith Nick: Prostitution Reform Bill — Second Reading 
Smith Nick: Prostitution Reform Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:606;Page:3627] 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH (NZ National—Nelson) 
: 
 I might share that member’s view if this bill proposed to make it illegal for the police to use safe-sex things like condoms as evidence in prosecutions. I might support the member if the bill proposed to even up the law and make the client as guilty as the prostitute. But that is not what the bill does. The bill proposes to decriminalise prostitution in this country and I think that would be a mistake. I want to outline to the House why I hold those views.  
Not so long ago we had a very similar conscience vote in this Parliament on the drinking age. At the heart of that debate was the belief that people would be much more responsible under a liberalised law. Well how many people believe that today? It is my view that that legislation was an error. Parliament in reducing the drinking age has only increased the amount of under-age drinking and society is the poorer for it. I say the same thing will happen with regard to this bill.  
I am also interested that members have said that this bill would somehow make working in the sex industry safe. I say that is an oxymoron. I reflect on the wise comments of people like Nanaia Mahuta and Judith Collins and I say they are right to argue that there is no such thing as a safe sex worker.  
I want to go to the core of this debate. This will sound a bit unusual for a person who is proud to stand for a National Party that stands for enterprise and the market. But equally so I know the limits of the market. It has seemed quite ironic to me to listen to the left-wing speeches from members of the Greens and the Labour Party who say the Nats fail to understand that not everything is for sale. Well I do stand in this House and say some things are not for sale. I do not think we should have a market for the sale of kids. Adoptions should be outside the market. When it comes to organs for donation and human body parts like blood I say that there is no place for a market in them. Equally I say that sex is the same. It is too special just to be part of the market forces and for such an intimate relationship to be just had for a few bucks. I am happy to stand on those principles because principles matter.  
I would also be interested to know from those members who say that prostitution should be decriminalised what the limit of that means. I am not sure of that. If prostitution is to become a legitimate job—and I believe that if a job is on offer one should take it—does that mean if we apply that approach that a person would be declined a benefit if he or she did not take up a job as a prostitute? That would be wrong. Does it mean that we should be able to advertise prostitution freely in our communities with hoardings and with advertisements in the newspapers? I say no. I think that is wrong. 
Hon Phil Goff 
: Hasn’t the member ever read the back page of the paper? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: I ask Mr Goff who is happy to stand in this House and say that rape is a crime—and we had a hot debate about that; we wanted to lock rapists up for longer—just what the difference is between rape and prostitution. How is it that when it comes to rape we want to have penalties that will lock people up for 20 years but suddenly if there is an exchange of money it is all OK and it will become an OK activity?  
Then we come to those who say prostitution is the oldest profession so we should just allow it. I think that is a morally bankrupt guide. This Parliament makes murder illegal but does anybody in this House believe that that means there will not be a single murder? No we do not believe that but we still maintain that standard. We say that assault dishonesty and theft are wrong. We all know that humanity is fallible and that in those things men and women are fallible but we still set that standard. I say the same standard should apply when it comes to prostitution.  
I now come to the broader issue and this is the real key. The real crux is this: what sort of society do we want to have in New Zealand? Even for those who have honestly presented an argument for liberalisation of the law that is the crux. I respect their point of view that prostitution is not necessarily something they like but that they think we should be pragmatic. 
The question I ask members as they make their conscience vote is this: will this bill result in more acts of prostitution in New Zealand? The honest answer has to be yes. If the answer to that is yes why would this Parliament want there to be more of something that I am convinced is harmful and not a good thing? Even those whose speeches have been in favour of the bill agree on that. As a father I want my daughter to grow up in a society in which there are clear lines about what it is and is not proper to sell. I want her to grow up in a society where sex is one of those special things that are not up for auction.