women in london

a directory of london based women's groups

and news of their work and activities

WiL menu

WiL Groups:

WiL site:

External:

other info:

calendars:

links to WiL:

Helplines:

Return to:

Notices and Press Releases

English Collective of Prostitutes : Opposition grows to compulsory rehabilitation and imprisonment of sex workers

Opposition is growing in and out of Parliament to proposed measures in the Criminal Justice & Immigration Bill now in the Lords which would a) introduce compulsory rehabilitation of sex workers with the power to imprison women for three days pending women being brought to court; and b) change the definition of soliciting to make it easier for the police to arrest women.

The Clauses on prostitution will be discussed in the Lords on the 26th or 27th of February. A wide range of individuals and organisations have written to Lord Faulkner pledging their support for his amendments to delete these provisions from the bill.

CLAUSE 123 abolishes the biased term "common prostitute", but brings in "persistent soliciting" so that "soliciting for the purposes of offering services as a prostitute" is considered "persistent if it takes place on two or more occasions in any period of three months". Soliciting twice over a period of three months would more appropriately be described as occasional. Defining it as persistent makes a mockery of the abolition of the term common prostitute as it will bring no reduction in the number of women arrested, and shows the government's intent to criminalise women.

CLAUSE 124 & 125 introduce compulsory rehabilitation for prostitute women, requiring anyone arrested for loitering or soliciting to attend a series of three meetings with a supervisor approved by the court. Failure to comply will result in a summons back to court and a possible 72 hours imprisonment. Rehabilitation is promoted as an alternative to a fine, but the court will still be able to impose fines and send women to prison for non-payment of a fine. Women could end up on a treadmill of broken supervision meetings, court orders and imprisonment.

Sex workers are mothers and/or young people working to support themselves and their families. There is no provision for resources to address the poverty, debt, low wages, rape and domestic violence, homelessness, drug use, depression or a combination of these, which drive many people into prostitution.

The number of women in prison has doubled in the past years - many are sex workers. Imprisoning women for non-violent offences goes against recent recommendations in the widely respected 2007 Corston Report. As women are society's primary carers, prison destroys families and punishes the thousands of children who are separated from their mothers' love, guidance and concern.

Opposition is being co-ordinated by the Safety First Coalition formed in the aftermath of the tragic murders of five young women in Ipswich. Initiated by the English Collective of Prostitutes, the Coalition brings together bereaved families, members of the church, nurses, doctors, probation officers, trade unionists, prison and drug reformers, anti-rape and anti-poverty campaigners and residents from red light areas. It campaigns for safety be prioritised and prostitution to be decriminalised, so that sex workers are no longer treated as criminals and therefore no longer vulnerable to violence of every kind.

A packed meeting in Parliament in January chaired by John McDonnell MP and Baroness Stern was attended by over 10 Peers who made clear they intend to vigorously oppose Clauses 123, 124 and 125.

Amendments submitted by Lord Faulkner with Baroness Miller of Chilthorne Domer, Baroness Stern and Baroness Howe of Idlicote:

Clauses 124 and 125, opposing their inclusion in the Bill

After Clause 125, Insert the following new Clause - "Definition of a brothel used for prostitution

(1) Premises shall not be regarded as a brothel where -
(a) no more than two women with or without a maid are working together or separately on any given day; and
(b) it is a single enterprise.

(2) Subsection (1) does not apply in the following situations where there is reasonable suspicion that -
(a) children are involved;
(b) trafficking in persons is involved;
(c) serious and organised crime is involved;
(d) know drug dealing is taking place."