Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.

Underground > Switchboard >

David Blunkett and the Happy Hookers

pointless and uncalled for

10:17 / 16.07.04

Finally, after decades of avoidance of a pressing and sensitive subject, an incumbent government is trying to tackle the issue of prostitution head on and including a forum of public debate.

I quote here from an internal Home Office statement: The Sexual Offences Act 2003 began the process of law reform with the introduction of new offences and tough penalties for those who exploit anyone for the purposes of prostitution or pornography. But this is the first time in decades that all of the issues surrounding prostitution have been examined in such detail.

It appears, according to the releases that are going about, that Blunkett wants to address the broad picture of an industry in which the British spend more than they do on movies. However, he has already been credited with approved tolerance zones (rebranded red-light districts?) before the horse is out of the gate.

So what do you think, is good old shite-eyes on the right track for once? Or will he end up further marginalising a group that is already very much under-represented in social structures.

Here are a handful of links to the news story.

BBC
Guardian
Ananova
Times

I appreciate the left-leaningness of the linkage but I'm just going with what I'm familiar with. Other links are welcome.

Our Lady Has Left the Building

11:35 / 16.07.04

You calling The Times left-wing?

Telegraph report.

I was surprised at Blunkett suggesting what I saw as a very liberal move, then one word jumped out at me.

'Licensed'

and then

'sex workers register'.

He can't get rid of his fixation with identity and ID Cards can he? if this goes anywhere beyond a consultation document check to see if Shiteyes claim that registering hookers is part of The War Against Terror.

Whale... Whale... Fish!

14:30 / 19.07.04

However, a previous suggestion that girls under the age of 18 should no longer be treated as offenders was firmly ruled out by Mr Blunkett.

"We believe there are compelling arguments for retaining this offence in respect of those under 18 to underline the message that prostitution involving children and young people is wholly unacceptable," said the consultation document.

Can someone explain this to me please? The way I understand this is that the girls themselves are treated as offenders. Is this right?

17:57 / 19.07.04

This legislation seems almost designed to fail, insofar as who's going to honestly be happy with seeing where they live being declared an " approved " red light area ? Personally, walking round Camden late at night ( where a lot of what used to be tacitly acceptable in King's Cross seems to have moved lately, post the re-development, ) just isn't funny any more. And especially not when the reality in London, at least, is that prostitution is already perfectly legal anyway, as anyone who's ever walked by a " sauna " place quite openly trading ought to know, really.

So why is he going near this particular issue ? He must know, realistically, that it's not going to work, so why bother ? I'm going to hazard a guess, and just shudder to think what kind of neo-con bullshit he's going to use the inevitable press scare as a cover for, ultimately.

I mean bearing in mind that this sort of diversionary tactic is classic New Labour, I don't honestly know what else to think.