Baldock Larry: Prostitution Reform Bill — In Committee 
Baldock Larry: Prostitution Reform Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:608;Page:5217] 
LARRY BALDOCK (United Future) 
: 
 I thank the Committee for that. I know that we want to move on to the substantive parts of the bill but I do feel that I need to take this last call on the title in order to complete some comments I was making earlier and also to respond to Russell Fairbrother’s comments. Again we have heard a misinformation campaign being promoted in this Parliament. Russell Fairbrother and I had an excellent debate in Napier a few weeks ago when we aired the topic quite well. 
We continually hear the statement that somehow out of moralising against prostitution we are criminalising it. On behalf of those of us who are opposed to this bill I say again that it is not illegal for women to engage in prostitution in New Zealand. It is clearly not illegal and I am astounded that we continually hear that statement. When the bill was beginning to be formed and the situation of prostitution in New Zealand was looked at it was noticed that there were some problems. One of the problems was in the massage parlour industry where prostitutes were being mistreated by their employers. I ask tonight why nobody thought about making some amendments to the Massage Parlours Act to address those concerns instead of going down the road of decriminalising the whole industry in order to try to solve some very minor problems. 
One of the problems of course is that it was not made clear when the Massage Parlours Act came into force whether a room in a massage parlour was a public place. As a result some prostitutes have been harassed for soliciting in massage parlours. To me it would seem to be a very simple thing to propose an amendment to that Act stating for the sake of clarity that a room in a massage parlour would not be a public place and that whatever activity went on in such a room between a woman and a man would therefore not be affected by the law. 
The genius of the Massage Parlours Act which we are really missing in this debate is that that Act enabled women to work independently of pimping. While it was a nod-nod wink-wink kind of situation for prostitution that Act did provide greater independence for women working as prostitutes in the massage parlour industry. As their employers—massage parlour owners—were legitimate employers it was entirely appropriate for those women to approach the Department of Labour and to address any of the concerns they have with such things as fines bonds and the things that we heard through the process of the Justice and Electoral Committee’s consideration of the bill that they are complaining about. I understand that almost two-thirds of prostitutes work in that environment and since 1978 that environment has given them some very useful protection. I warn the prostitutes of New Zealand that if they are exploited now they will exploited much more if this bill goes through and the full impact of legalised pimping is able to have an effect upon them. 
Many other prostitutes are independent operators and they have no legal impediments to their self-employed status at all. In fact the Inland Revenue Department currently has a booklet to help them know how to pay their taxes. That is why it is such a nonsense to go around saying that a prostitute cannot operate in this country without— 
Sue Bradford 
: But what about the people who were arrested in Auckland last month? 
LARRY BALDOCK 
: Women get arrested for street soliciting because it is illegal under the legislation. The police act sometimes because the soliciting is going on in places where it should not be or because it may be going on inappropriately. The good thing is that the police are able to step in and act when they need to often in order to protect either the lives of the prostitutes themselves or the public who are being affected. It is a very good thing to have that happen. If we decriminalise prostitution and the police therefore do not bother to intervene at all there will be far worse consequences. I do not think that 12 prostitutes being arrested a few weeks ago in Auckland out of the supposed 8000 who operate in this country is a major concern. 
If we do have 8000 prostitutes in this country we already have the highest rate of prostitution per population in the Western World. Would this bill lead to an increased number? No one knows for sure though all the overseas evidence points to the very possibility of an increase. But maybe New Zealand is already saturated because we have had a very liberalised environment here for the last 10 or 15 years. 
They did do research on prostitution in Sweden. Russell Fairbrother made the comment that the problem in this country is that we do not know the real state of the sex industry and said we should investigate that before we pass laws. In Sweden they investigated the situation for 4 years in order to make sure they knew what the situation was and to monitor the changes that might occur after the law had been passed. That would be a very wise thing for us to do in New Zealand. In Sweden they discovered that one in eight adult men were using prostitutes. Let us just think about that. One in eight is quite a high ratio but Sweden has only 2500 prostitutes for a population of 8 million. We are constantly being told that we have 8000 prostitutes for a population that is half that size. I hate to think what the ratio might be if those figures are true. I do not believe that there are more than one in eight men in New Zealand using prostitutes each week. I do not think we really know what the situation is. When this bill is passed it will be far too easy for the review panel to claim that things have not changed because we really do not know what they are like before we pass this bill. 
If massage parlour operators or workers have problems at present the New Zealand Prostitutes Collective can do a very good job of helping them to address those concerns through the Department of Labour because they are covered by current employment law. There is no need for this bill to be passed in order to give prostitutes protection from our current law. They already have protections under the Human Rights Act and our employment laws. One has to ask the question though of why we are doing all this for 8000—if that is the correct number—women. We are all concerned for their situation but we have to think about some other people in society as well. 
It is admirable in a democracy for the majority to care for a small minority but very little has been said about some of the other silent majorities in this country. Prostitutes estimate that 75 percent of their clients are married men. Who is speaking up in this debate for the approximately 75000 married women who do not know what is going on? What about the sexual health of those married women? We are focusing our attention on the sexual health of perhaps 8000 prostitutes but there are 75000 wives who do not know where their husbands have been and their sexual health is of concern to us. If I had to decide between the two I would stand up for those who are in the dark and do not know what is going on rather than those who know exactly what they are doing and can take steps to protect themselves if they so wish. I thank the Chair for his indulgence. 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: The amendment in the name of Marc Alexander to clause 1 to omit the word “reform” and substitute the word “perform” is ruled out of order as it is not an objective description of the bill’s contents. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Dr Paul Hutchison to clause 1 be agreed to: 
to omit the words “Prostitution Reform Act” and substitute the words “Decriminalisation of Prostitution and Related Activities Act”. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Gordon Copeland to clause 1 be agreed to: 
to omit the words “Prostitution Reform Act 2000” and substitute the words “Prostitution Solicitation Pimping and Brothel-keeping Decriminalisation Act 2003”. 
Amendment not agreed to.