Page 3174 - Week 12 - Wednesday, 18 November 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Workers in Sex Employment in the ACT have asked members of this Assembly not to vote for the Prostitution Bill. It is fairly obvious that health checks do not keep prostitutes disease free. Anybody having sex can be infected by their next customer.
Mr Moore: Well, don't do it.
MR STEVENSON: Condom use cannot be ensured, particularly when brothel owners are subjected to competition, which will probably increase in Canberra if this legislation is passed. Mr Moore interjected a moment ago and said, "Well, don't do it". I think that is the suggestion of quite a few people around Canberra. We have surveyed the question of legalising prostitution, and it seems that there is a balance of community view. It is half and half. Slightly more people would not legalise it, but it is so close as to be not of concern. Most people have an opinion on it. But there has been no call from the community for these changes. There has certainly been no call from young people in Canberra. There has been no call from families in Canberra.
Mr Lamont: Workers in Sex?
MR STEVENSON: Mr Lamont mentions Workers in Sex. Just two minutes ago I said that they asked members to vote against the Prostitution Bill. A recent Sydney study has shown that, while condom use by prostitutes decreases disease, obviously it does not cut it out altogether. So, there is still a cause for concern about sexually transmitted diseases. Ms Szuty talked about AIDS, not general STDs. There is probably a three-month incubation period for AIDS. Certainly it would take weeks, possibly months or years, to show up in a blood sample. In the meantime, if a prostitute has AIDS, hundreds of clients could be infected and pass on that infection to other people. I understand, as all would, that no prostitute wants to get any sexually transmitted disease. Indeed, most of them would do all in their power to ensure that that did not happen.
This legislation suggests that the onus for ensuring that a condom is worn should be on the brothel owner. The prostitutes believe that the onus does and should reside with prostitutes and their clients. That would make far more sense than the onus residing with the brothel owner. While brothel owners may be able to encourage the use of condoms, they certainly do not have the final responsibility. I realise that the legislation talks about brothel owners doing whatever is reasonable, but who is going to police the offence of having sex without a condom? We hear no comment. We have been told by some police that they feel that the situation is about as good as you will get. They regularly check brothels. They have some fairly tight restrictions in the area. They particularly want to keep out criminal activity. They enforce other laws, execute outstanding warrants and so on.
As a former New South Wales policeman who worked in the heart of the city, I realise that there are concerns about how you police prostitution. The revolving door principle that we had in New South Wales did not work. Prostitutes would be picked up of an evening, and a whole pile of them would appear before the beak - as we used to call the magistrate - the next morning.
Mr Moore: Some coppers were wealthy.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .