Manukau City Council (Regulation of Prostitution in Specified Places) Bill

Hon GEORGE HAWKINS (Labour—Manurewa) Link to this

I move, That the Manukau City Council (Regulation of Prostitution in Specified Places) Bill be now read a first time. At the appropriate time I intend to move that the bill be considered by the Local Government and Environment Committee. Before I delve into this bill, I want to pass on to the people of Canterbury the sympathy that I think everyone here has for what happened to those people. When one has been the Minister of Civil Defence, one knows the problems going on, and I say to John Carter that many people appreciate the work he is doing.

This bill is on behalf of the Manukau City Council. It will allow the council to make by-laws designating any place a specified place; it requires a by-law to be made and reviewed in a manner similar to that of a by-law made under the Local Government Act 2002; it prohibits the conduct of the business of prostitution or the supply or receipt of any commercial sexual service in a specified place; and it provides the police with powers to arrest a person committing an offence under this legislation.

This whole question goes way back to the Prostitution Reform Act 2003, which was passed by one solitary vote. Since then, Manukau City Council has been back to this House, trying to get legislation to help it overcome a difficulty it has. In my electorate of Manurewa and in Ross Robertson’s electorate of Manukau East we have been plagued by street prostitution for a number of years. Of course, it has a huge impact on the community. When shopkeepers have to clean up used condoms, vomit, and urine in their shopfronts, people get very upset. When kids on their way to school see that, they are annoyed. The Prostitution Reform Act 2003 did not solve the problem. In most areas, people work in brothels, but we have a certain class of people who, I think, make life bad for others. This bill is supported by the two chief mayoral contestants for the super-city. They are Len Brown and, of course, John Banks. Here they are, soliciting themselves on the front cover of Metro magazine. They are soliciting for votes, which is far different from anything else.

Dr PAUL HUTCHISON (National—Hunua) Link to this

Thank you for the opportunity to speak on the Manukau City Council (Regulation of Prostitution in Specified Places) Bill. I congratulate the Hon George Hawkins on sponsoring the bill on behalf of the Manukau City Council. I believe the council requested he do so, and as a good local member and an aspirant member of the new local council he has done so. We wish him well in the forthcoming elections. The aim of this bill is to stop prostitution in specified places throughout Manukau City. I note that the 2008 review of the Prostitution Reform Act 2003 concluded that most territorial authorities had no problems with the sex industry in their districts and had received few complaints about it.

However, that is not so in Manukau City and in Christchurch, and we have heard some fairly explicit descriptions of what goes on in Manukau City and around that area. There is no doubt that it is pretty awful. The council tried to have a bill introduced in 2005 to bring attention to the problem and to impose a complete ban on street prostitution in Manukau, but it was defeated. Following efforts by councillors to make suggestions, this bill is the result. I think the Hon George Hawkins agrees that it is far from perfect, but, indeed, I support this bill. I think the situation is very serious, and it is worthy of referral to the Local Government and Environment Committee for detailed discussion to see whether something useful can come from it.

A variety of difficulties with this bill have been pointed out. The first one is that once we ban street prostitution from one area like Hunters Corner, the prostitutes will go elsewhere and we could keep passing by-laws until the area is more or less covered. Another thing is that the police are concerned that prostitutes will become wary of the extra policing, lighting, and all the rest, and the police may have to bring in undercover agents. Through this bill, the police have the power to arrest on suspicion and to impose fines up to a value of $2,000. But, clearly, this could be a merry-go-round. I note that the Prostitutes Collective is against this bill because its view is it is very important that if prostitutes are to carry out their profession in the streets they should not have to move to less safe places that are dimly lit, where all sorts of problems can occur.

It is worthwhile pointing out the aims of the original Prostitution Reform Act of 2003. They were to decriminalise prostitution, although not endorsing or normally sanctioning prostitution or its use; to create a framework to safeguard the human rights of sex workers, and to protect them from exploitation; to promote the welfare and occupational health and safety of sex workers; to contribute to public health; and to prohibit the use in prostitution of persons under the age of 18. I think most of those aims were very, very important, and the review suggested that most of those aims were being fulfilled. There is no doubt that safe sex and diminishing the problems of infectious disease and sexually transmitted disease was one issue that was very important to improve in New Zealand at that time. In this issue of prostitution in Manukau City, there is what has been described as a variety of unsavoury debris—needles, used condoms, vomit, and urine—found close to schools and places of work, which has to be cleared up, day after day.

There are also under-age sex workers. I was very concerned when I heard the Hon Maurice Williamson point out that when he went around these areas with some of the councillors and expressed his concern about young women, who were clearly under age, being with the older prostitutes, one of them came up to him and said: “Look, you’ve got to realise that these young women are here, they are under our protection, they are being fed, and they are given money. If they were at home, they would be beaten up, they would be raped by their parents, and their life would be made even worse.” I think this describes the huge difficulty of this whole problem. Certainly, during the debate on the 2003 bill, under-age sex—prostitutes going from legalised situations to illegal ones—was one of the big difficulties predicted at that time. Here in Manukau City we have the problem of it happening overtly, night after night.

This bill will give only a limited amount of assistance to what is occurring very explicitly. It does not solve the wider problem of illegal prostitution, and particularly under-age prostitution. They need to be addressed in a systematic and very careful manner, as outlined in the review of the 2003 Act. Nevertheless, this bill has arisen because of a repeated problem in a specific part of New Zealand. I agree it is worthy of being supported to the select committee, and I congratulate once again the Hon George Hawkins on his sponsorship of this bill. Thank you.

SU’A WILLIAM SIO (Labour—Māngere) Link to this

It is my pleasure to rise to support the Manukau City Council (Regulation of Prostitution in Specified Places) Bill in respect of street prostitution. I think it is important for members of this House to note that this bill is not about eliminating prostitution. There is no effort whatsoever being made to repeal the Prostitution Reform Act. This bill is about addressing a problem that the people of the Manukau City Council acknowledge has existed for some time in their midst. It is a problem that has caused quite a lot of pain within some sectors of that community. No doubt my colleague to my right, Ross Robertson, and my colleague to my left, George Hawkins, who represent those communities, will have more to say on this issue.

I think it is important to say that we are not about trying to eliminate prostitution, and I do not think that will ever be possible. For as long as there is violence in the home, women are beaten up, and women and children are sexually abused, there will be people who feel inclined that this is perhaps a way for them to earn a living and a way for them to pay back the people whom they might be angry with. As long as there are men out there with money who are willing to buy this kind of service, then we will always have that sad situation in our community.

I say also that this bill is not driven by any moral outrage, despite the fact that in the early days of the Prostitution Reform Act, the Manukau community felt as though it had every right to say no to what was being proposed then. It is important that members note that this bill focuses specifically on street prostitution.

I understand that the members of the Manukau City Council are united in sending a very strong signal to this House that it is a problem and that they simply want this bill to be referred to a select committee so that we can listen to the evidence that is available from the public, particularly the public of Manukau, and so that we can also get some advice in terms of how we deal with this particular problem. The problem is that the Prostitution Reform Act does not protect the women who are offering their services on the streets. Despite the work of the council in advocating for social services and protection from other agencies, and its work in ensuring that these areas are lit, have closed-circuit television, and are monitored by security, the fact remains that it is not only unsafe for those practising their services on the street but also unsafe for members of the local community when they have to deal with the nuisance factor that arises from street prostitution.

I will not say anything further, except to say that this bill is a major improvement on the previous bill that was forwarded by the Manukau City Council in 2005. It is the view of the council, which I support, that the Prostitution Reform Act has failed to protect street workers or to move them to safer settings indoors. As I said, this bill will not provide the sole answer. It is a tool, as we explore how to try to deal with the unsafe situation of young people, mainly, who feel that they have to offer their services on the street. We need to provide a balance so that their rights as prostitutes are protected and the rights of the community are maintained.

KANWALJIT SINGH BAKSHI (National) Link to this

It is my pleasure to stand and speak on the Manukau City Council (Regulation of Prostitution in Specified Places) Bill, which was introduced by the Hon George Hawkins. The bill aims to address behaviour associated with street prostitution in certain areas of Manukau City. Prostitution is one of the oldest professions in the world, and I respect those who are in that profession. They take on that profession because of their circumstances, not by choice. We say slavery has vanished from modern civilisation, but that is not true. Still it exists. It applies only to women, and it is known as prostitution.

My out-of-Parliament office is in Papatoetoe, at Hunters Corner, and several people have come to my office to complain about street prostitution. Street prostitution at Hunters Corner is a major issue for the residents and business owners in Papatoetoe. Businesses complain that they have found used condoms in their car parks and doorways, and that human waste has been left against the walls of their businesses. Schoolchildren from Papatoetoe Central School, Papatoetoe High School, and Papatoetoe Intermediate School walk past those areas on their way to and from school.

Papatoetoe is a community of good people and it is a pleasant place to live, yet it is dramatically dragged down by a very small minority. During the day Hunters Corner looks like a corner on any shopping strip: a steady stream of traffic passes a pick ‘n’ mix of offices, takeaways, and grocery shops. But as night falls Hunters Corner is hunted by the predators of sex.

The proposed law will make Papatoetoe and Manukau a safer area to live and work in. We need to protect our community and our youngsters. When the Prostitution Reform Act 2003 was enacted, I doubted that anyone would have thought that street prostitution at Hunters Corner would increase so drastically. Even though this bill does not address all the issues, I support the bill at its first reading.

TE URUROA FLAVELL (Māori Party—Waiariki) Link to this

Kia ora, Mr Deputy Speaker. Kia ora tātou katoa. I take just a brief call on the Manukau City Council (Regulation of Prostitution in Specified Places) Bill to state where the Māori Party sits. We are aligned as a party in respect of our stand on this issue.

We recognise that Māori might take up some roles here and there—just like any other New Zealander—in the wider sex industry. Some will be street-based workers; the research tells us that Māori are more likely to be represented here than in managed or private businesses. Māori may be managers or owners, and Māori may access commercial sexual services. But a wider group of whānau is also affected either by their family member’s involvement in the sex industry, or simply as members of communities in which the business of prostitution, or commercial services, plays out.

Prominent in our thinking around any legislation to do with the sex industry is the matter of health and public safety, not just of the workers but of the greater community as a whole. The literature tells us that people enter the industry primarily for economic reasons. Most sex workers are female, and female workers most often cited the need to pay for household expenses as well as to support their families. Ironically, it is the working conditions—the flexible working hours and the ability to earn money readily, at rates often exceeding the minimum hourly wage—that attract many of the participants.

Some research provided to the Prostitution Law Review Committee also provided some interesting ideas around how to encourage workers to exit the industry. Transgender sex workers spoke of the lack of acceptance in society and the feeling of belonging that they got from working with people who were more similar to them. Young sex workers also spoke of the feeling of acceptance and the family-like atmosphere they got from working on the streets. So some bigger issues around the existence of the sex industry need to be tackled before one simply imposes a ban that prohibits the business, as with this particular bill.

All of that background being in place, when the Ministry of Justice reported back on 1 May 2009 about the impact of the prostitution law reform it concluded: “localised approaches are likely to be more effective than legislation” for dealing with the issue. It recommended that the council, the police, residents, business owners, and sex workers work together to address the community tensions and antisocial behaviour set out by other colleagues in the House this afternoon.

It is very hard to understand why Mr Hawkins would ignore that advice and put a bill forward anyway. Even more worrying is the extent of the new authorities that Mr Hawkins is seeking to invest in the police to deal with prostitution by granting officers powers of arrest that would enable them to stop and search vehicles and demand that passengers state their private details, merely on suspicion of committing an offence under this Act. We do not find favour with that. If the passengers—frightened, embarrassed, or fearful of being outed—happen to object, they will be stung anyway with a $1,000 fine.

So many other things could have been done to improve the health and safety of people in Manukau City. For example, appropriately targeted and well-designed programmes can offer support, education, and advocacy to young Māori and others involved in prostitution. The programmes provided by Te Aronga Hōu Ināianei, for example, provide services to those soliciting on the streets of Counties-Manukau. The outreach service, the toro atu, is a mobile service offering information and support. The āwhinatia service links takatāpui and youth with appropriate support services. The knowledge and training service, mātauranga, provides well-being education, awareness programmes, personal development, and vocational rehabilitation.

We do not support this bill going forward. We believe that it sets an undesirable precedent in creating a local exception to the Prostitution Reform Act. Finally, we believe that those involved in the sex industry are regulated far more effectively by family and peers than by legislation and the police.

KEVIN HAGUE (Green) Link to this

Our caucus sometimes has debates over bills that we do not support, or that we support only in part, as to whether there is some value in allowing them to go to select committee in the hope that a better bill may emerge. Today I stand to say that the Green Party does not support the Manukau City Council (Regulation of Prostitution in Specified Places) Bill. However, some of our members believe that there would be value in discussing the issues further in a select committee, and they will vote for the bill’s first reading on that basis. Those members believe that local communities should make local decisions, if this is possible without undermining the law.

The majority of us, however, will oppose the bill at its first reading. Our reasons for opposing the bill are exactly the same as the reasons that the Green Party vigorously opposed the equivalent bill the last time that George Hawkins introduced it in 2005, and are the same reasons that the Green Party strongly supported Tim Barnett’s original Prostitution Reform Act. The bill enables the council to re-criminalise soliciting in particular areas of its choosing. This effectively recreates exactly the imposition on the rights of sex workers that existed under the old law, except that the penalties will be 10 times higher. It is constitutionally objectionable furthermore for local authorities effectively to create criminal law.

The point of the Prostitution Reform Act was to focus the law on those behaviours that can be associated with soliciting that present actual problems, such as people being harassed or intimidated, offensive signage or behaviour, or used condoms left in public places. There are solutions and remedies for all of those behaviours. Rather than the moral objections that some people have about prostitution, this principle is being reversed by the bill that stands before us today.

I am not belittling the concerns or the anxiety of the Manukau City Council, local residents, or shopkeepers; rather, I am restating the point of view that I expressed back in 2003 as the executive director of the New Zealand Aids Foundation, alongside my colleagues from the New Zealand Family Planning Association, the National Council of Women, the Māori Women’s Welfare League, the Public Health Association, the New Zealand Federation of Business and Professional Women, the YWCA, and many other organisations. Those concerns were that marginalised, desperate, and vulnerable members of our society who end up street-based soliciting in places such as Hunters Corner are easier to reach out to with services and with information if they are not doubly victimised and hiding from criminal sanctions such as those again proposed in this bill.

Street-based soliciting at Hunters Corner is hardly a new phenomenon. It was extensively discussed in the debate and in the submissions made on Tim’s original bill. The arguments being made tonight in favour of this bill were considered and rejected at that time and then considered and rejected again in 2005 by the Local Government and Environment Committee and by Parliament. Then in 2008 the Prostitution Law Review Committee visited the areas that the council was concerned about, discussed the issues broadly, and heard from the police that they were more concerned about family violence and abuse of alcohol in these areas. The review committee again rejected the arguments advanced by the council, endorsing the recommendation made by the select committee.

In 2009 the crime prevention unit of the Ministry of Justice undertook another comprehensive review of the specific issues addressed by the bill, published under the title Review of street-based prostitution in Manukau City. Again the review concluded—as have all reviews—that localised measures for working with sex workers and non-governmental organisations were a more productive way to address any actual problems being experienced and that legislative approaches were unlikely to be effective and were quite likely to create fresh problems.

In summary, this bill intends to unwind the intent of the original Act. It is constitutionally repugnant, has been considered frequently and in great depth, and is both extremely unlikely to achieve its intent and likely to further marginalise some of the most vulnerable members in our entire society. It is a waste of this House’s time. I do not support it going any further.

H V ROSS ROBERTSON (Labour—Manukau East) Link to this

Tēnā koe. Street prostitution can be dangerous. Often in this House we pass legislation with good intentions, sometimes not knowing its effects on, or ramifications for, the people whom we seek to serve. Since the legalisation of prostitution, the residents of Hunters Corner in Papatoetoe have never been the same. That also goes for the residents of Ōtāhuhu, which also has a street problem. I can tell this House that some traumatic incidents have occurred over the years since the legalisation of prostitution—and out of the public eye. As the local member for both areas, I am continually reminded by concerned citizens about the state of Hunters Corner when daylight resumes each day, with faeces, condoms, vomit, and drug paraphernalia left in shop doorways, and residents woken by actions that concern all and sundry. This evening I stand with and for the people of my electorate, and I will vote to support the Manukau City Council (Regulation of Prostitution in Specified Places) Bill going to a select committee at its first reading.

The bill is not opposed to prostitution—only to where it is carried out. Street prostitution can be dangerous. It can be a dangerous environment in which to work. Such workers are less accessible to health workers, who provide a community education programme with a focus on sexual and reproductive health and on HIV/AIDS. The New Zealand Prostitutes Collective also provides community drop-in centres and outreach services throughout New Zealand where prostitutes can access a range of occupational health and safety support services, including sexual health advice, the use of health clinics, and needle exchange programmes. Peer education and support are also provided on a range of issues concerning the health, safety, and welfare of sex workers. Street prostitution can be dangerous.

I emphasise again, as both of my colleagues have done this evening, that this bill is not about eliminating prostitution or revising the Prostitution Reform Act, which was passed in 2003. No, it is about where prostitution is carried out. As the explanatory note of the bill states, “The purpose of the bill is to authorise the Manukau City Council to make bylaws prohibiting the business of prostitution or commercial sexual services in specified public places in Manukau City. The business of prostitution in private premises carried on in accordance with the provisions of the Prostitution Reform Act 2003 will not be affected.” That is where my two colleagues and I from the city of Manukau come from. We recognise that there is a problem. I have campaigned continuously for Hunters Corner in Papatoetoe to be cleaned up. In fact, in 2008 I raised the issue with the Mayor of Manukau, Len Brown, and also with the Counties-Manukau Police District commander, Superintendent Mike Bush. They advised that neither of them had the power to do anything about it, because no crimes were being committed.

This proposed legislation allows local businesses and residents to object to prostitution taking place on our streets, where it causes nuisance or serious offence to members of the public. It will have no impact whatsoever on brothels or smaller owner-operated brothels. The bill allows for an assessment of the impact of street prostitution in specific public places in Manukau City. I stand here tonight, along with my colleagues, to support Manukau City Council’s legislation in order that we can do something to protect our street workers. Tihei mauri ora! Tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou katoa.

Dr CAM CALDER (National) Link to this

I rise to speak in support of this local bill, the Manukau City Council (Regulation of Prostitution in Specified Places) Bill, which has been submitted by my colleague the Hon George Hawkins on behalf of the Manukau City Council. I am proud to be the National MP based in Manurewa, which is a vibrant and diverse community, full of hard-working families ambitious for themselves and for their children.

Street prostitution, as my colleague Mr Ross Robertson observed, is a dangerous occupation for its practitioners. It impacts negatively on our community, and it has proved to be an intractable problem in our community for a number of years. This bill will authorise the Manukau City Council to make bylaws that will designate specific public places within the boundaries of Manukau City where no person is permitted to conduct the business of prostitution or to supply or receive any commercial sexual services.

The Government, the Manukau City Council, and local business associations have effected huge improvements in our local Manurewa town centre over the last couple of years. The activities of prostitutes plying their trade in public spaces, such as Manurewa town centre and also the Hunters Corner area of Papatoetoe, significantly detract from the civic amenity and impact negatively on community pride. Householders and businesses often have to deal with the unsavoury aftermath. Syringes that litter the ground and other debris are not the welcome mat to Manurewa that this community wants.

I stand for a safer community. I stand for a Manurewa where our young people are encouraged to unlock the treasure trove of potential that lies within them all, a Manurewa where our young people are drenched with exhilaration at the opportunities available to them. I commend this bill to the House, and I support its referral to a select committee.

Hon GEORGE HAWKINS (Labour—Manurewa) Link to this

First of all I thank the pretender to the throne of Manurewa, Cam Calder, for getting up—that person from the North Shore is concerned about street prostitution, as well. I thank all the people in the House who have spoken today from whatever point of view, because I believe that addressing that issue is very important. I thank even those people who spoke against the Manukau City Council (Regulation of Prostitution in Specified Places) Bill. When we have legislation that deals with local problems, then I think a bit of passion comes out.

I have had people, over the course of time, tell me that instead of picking on the prostitutes, we should pick on the men who use them, and arrest those men. That is not a bad idea.