Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Carnival

Who Will Replace Keith Vaz as Chair of the HSAC? Three Contenders so far.

21 posts in this topic

Labour’s Yvette Cooper, current committee member Chuka Umunna, and former Home Office minister Caroline Flint are standing to replace Keith Vaz as the chair of the Home Affairs Select Committee.

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/yvette-cooper-keith-vaz-home-affairs_uk_57d7edace4b0a32e2f6cbc56

 

Caroline Flint is on record as being extremely hostile to the idea of sex work as a legitimate free choice profession. Example tweet:

Prostitution isn’t an industry it’s part of organised crime in which vulnerable women, men & children are exploited.

See http://sexandcensorship.org/2016/03/caroline-flints-anti-sex-worker-bigotry/

 

Yvette Cooper has been less prominent in this arena but was listed in the Guardian when they reported that:

Prominent Labour women, including Harriet Harman, Caroline Flint and Jess Phillips, reacted with fury after Corbyn told students at Goldsmiths university in London on Thursday night: “I am in favour of decriminalising the sex industry,”

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/mar/06/labour-backbenchers-confront-corbyn-sex-industry-stance

 

Because of rules governing allocation of committee chairmanships, the next chair must be a Labour MP.

All MPs will get a vote in the election.

 

Edited by Carnival
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Carnival said:

Labour’s Yvette Cooper, current committee member Chuka Umunna, and former Home Office minister Caroline Flint are standing to replace Keith Vaz as the chair of the Home Affairs Select Committee.

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/yvette-cooper-keith-vaz-home-affairs_uk_57d7edace4b0a32e2f6cbc56

 

Caroline Flint is on record as being extremely hostile to the idea of sex work as a legitimate free choice profession. Example tweet:

Prostitution isn’t an industry it’s part of organised crime in which vulnerable women, men & children are exploited.

See http://sexandcensorship.org/2016/03/caroline-flints-anti-sex-worker-bigotry/

 

Yvette Cooper has been less prominent in this arena but was listed in the Guardian when they reported that:

Prominent Labour women, including Harriet Harman, Caroline Flint and Jess Phillips, reacted with fury after Corbyn told students at Goldsmiths university in London on Thursday night: “I am in favour of decriminalising the sex industry,”

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/mar/06/labour-backbenchers-confront-corbyn-sex-industry-stance

 

Because of rules governing allocation of committee chairmanships, the next chair must be a Labour MP.

All MPs will get a vote in the election.

 

what a depressing herd of cockwombles.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Carnival said:

Because of rules governing allocation of committee chairmanships, the next chair must be a Labour MP.

All MPs will get a vote in the election.

 

I see that Nordic Model Now are asking their supporters  to lobby their MPs to ask them to vote for a chair who "must be female and should have experience in the field of male violence against women and girls."

Here is their template letter:-

Dear [MP’s name]

I am writing to express my serious concerns about the Home Affairs Select Committee’s interim report on its prostitution inquiry.

When the interim report was released in early July, campaign group, Nordic Model Now! published a response setting out its bias, including:

  • It failed to recognise the serious harms of prostitution both to those who are in it and to the wider society and that nothing can make prostitution safe.
  • It failed to mention the UK’s binding obligations under the Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, especially Women and Children (known as the Palermo Protocol) to tackle both the demand for prostitution and the poverty and inequality that together drive sex trafficking.
  • It failed to consider the impact of prostitution on equality between the sexes in contravention of the UK’s binding obligations under the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW).
  • It ignored important recommendations about how to improve protection of children.
  • It wrote off the evidence from a large number of women’s organisations, survivors of prostitution, and other individuals who argued for the Nordic Model, incorrectly labelling them “emotive” and based on “moral” judgements.
  • It insisted – against all the evidence and common sense – that prostitution and sex trafficking are completely separate issues.
  • It did not accept the internationally agreed definition of sex trafficking and the implications of this definition.
  • It ignored evidence that sex buyers are more likely to be sexually aggressive than other men and so any increase in the numbers of men buying sex is likely to lead to higher rates of rape and sexual violence generally.
  • It dismissed evidence of the success of the Nordic Model (also known as the Sex Buyer Law).
  • When discussing the Nordic Model, the report quoted more than five times as many individuals and organisations that opposed the approach as favoured it, even though some had clear vested interests in the sex trade and some of the quotations were based on conjecture and not evidence, and at least one was based on entirely fabricated information.
  • It uncritically accepted the purported success of the New Zealand approach (which fully decriminalises all aspects of the sex trade, including pimping and brothel keeping) and ignored evidence that it has not in fact made the lives of women in prostitution safer or better and has led to an increase in child prostitution and sex trafficking.

For more about what was wrong with the interim report, please see Nordic Model Now’s full response at https://nordicmodelnow.org/2016/07/17/response-to-the-home-affairs-select-committees-interim-report-on-prostitution/.

Eight out of the eleven committee members were male and prostitution has a very different impact on men than on women. Men make up 99% or more of the buyers. Women and girls on the other hand make up the vast majority (80% or more) of those who are bought and sold. And when the buying and selling of one woman is legitimised, it implies that any woman, anywhere, can be bought and sold, reducing her to a commodity.

We now know that the inquiry chair, Keith Vaz, is someone who buys sexual access to vulnerable young people. The Times reported on Saturday 10 September that he said about one of them that “Someone will need to break him tonight.” Vaz’s conflict of interests goes some way to explain the extreme bias of the interim report. It does not, however, explain why all of the other members signed it off.

I am therefore writing to call on you to back the Nordic Model Now! demands:

  1. The interim report must be scrapped.
  2. All members of the inquiry must make a declaration of their sex buying history or step down.
  3. At least 50% of the members of the inquiry must be female.
  4. The chair must be female and should have experience in the field of male violence against women and girls.
  5. All evidence must be weighed against our obligations under the Palermo Protocol and CEDAW.

I also call on you to back the Nordic Model as the only human rights-based approach to prostitution. This decriminalises those who are prostituted, provides services to help them exit, and makes buying human beings for sex a criminal offence, in order to reduce the demand that drives sex trafficking.

Please write to the Home Secretary on my behalf to ask her to address the demands laid out above and to call for the implementation of the Nordic Model in England and Wales.

Yours sincerely

I wonder if there is any way in which a collective response to and critique of this letter could be circulated to MPs before they vote for the new chair. Perhaps from the ECP or from one of the teams of academics who are dedicated to serious academic research into sex work and sex workers.

 

Edited by Carnival

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Carnival said:

Please write to the Home Secretary on my behalf to ask her to address the demands laid out above and to call for the implementation of the Nordic Model in England and Wales.

 

 

I imagine any MP writing to the Home Secretary Amber Rudd along the lines suggested above might receive a positive response, as she was a member of the All Party Parliamentary Group whose report in 2014 recommended that the UK should adopt the Nordic model.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There was a funny cartoon a week ago: two civil servants were chatting outside what was clearly the Home Affairs Parliamentary Committee room.

The caption was: "We need a new chair who is knowledgeable about drugs and prostitution, but not an expert"

It's not so amusing now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To live and die at Porterhouse...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as I know, Mrs Balls. aka Yvette Cooper had to be told at the very last minute she could not say in her final Labour Pary conference pre election speech that she wanted the Nordick Model brought into British Law!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My thinking has always been that these people (you know who I am talking about) are on a moral crusade, that they just don't care about the damage they would cause to women in the sex industry whose interests they claim to be concerned about.  I'm begining to think I may be wrong and that they are simple deluded.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hang about-Keith Vaz was a member of the APPG on prostitution which recommended the Nordic model. Perhaps we should campaign  (as the NMN does) for that report to be torn up

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, bobbles said:

Hang about-Keith Vaz was a member of the APPG on prostitution which recommended the Nordic model. Perhaps we should campaign  (as the NMN does) for that report to be torn up

Saying one thing and then the other seems to be a speciality with him. He denounced the Ayatollah's fatwah on Rushdie before leading a march of his Muslim constituents demanding the book be banned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Colonel Bonkers said:

Saying one thing and then the other seems to be a speciality with him. He denounced the Ayatollah's fatwah on Rushdie before leading a march of his Muslim constituents demanding the book be banned.

Could have been an Ideal candidate for a Tory PM.:lol:

 

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whoever replaces him I doubt it will change much in the long run. The last time there was a proper Home Office examination of current policy, which was in about 2004, they recommended establishing tolerance zones, then the usual array of busybodies made a song and dance and so nothing was changed. The current PM, Theresa May, opposed Harriet Harman's proposal to criminalise buyers of sex in 2009, and showed absolutely fuck all interest in making any changes during her 6+ years as Home Secretary. Shes clearly not one of those wishy washy politician types who has to constantly dream up eye-catching new policies and initiatives like, say, Cameron or Blair. She did not respond at all to Corbyn's expressed support for decriminalisation as far as I know (nor did Cameron or any other prominent Tory for that matter) when it was in the news. 

The Nordic model would be pretty much impossible to effectively implement in this country for multiple reasons, and there is little evidence of public support for such a policy here. And besides the PM and her cabinet are likely to be so pre-occupied with the post-Brexit fallout for the foreseeable future, that I can't fathom any reason why they would wish to implement such a radical change in policy where the political gains are pretty much non-existent, and would likely just become another political headache they could do without. Generally nobody gives a shit about what goes on in knocking shops or hotel rooms, provided it's not shoved in their faces. All this is of course assuming the committee does eventually opt to back the Nordic model, which isn't looking very likely so far.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Occasionalbuyer said:

Whoever replaces him I doubt it will change much in the long run. The last time there was a proper Home Office examination of current policy, which was in about 2004, they recommended establishing tolerance zones, then the usual array of busybodies made a song and dance and so nothing was changed. The current PM, Theresa May, opposed Harriet Harman's proposal to criminalise buyers of sex in 2009, and showed absolutely fuck all interest in making any changes during her 6+ years as Home Secretary. Shes clearly not one of those wishy washy politician types who has to constantly dream up eye-catching new policies and initiatives like, say, Cameron or Blair. She did not respond at all to Corbyn's expressed support for decriminalisation as far as I know (nor did Cameron or any other prominent Tory for that matter) when it was in the news. 

The Nordic model would be pretty much impossible to effectively implement in this country for multiple reasons, and there is little evidence of public support for such a policy here. And besides the PM and her cabinet are likely to be so pre-occupied with the post-Brexit fallout for the foreseeable future, that I can't fathom any reason why they would wish to implement such a radical change in policy where the political gains are pretty much non-existent, and would likely just become another political headache they could do without. Generally nobody gives a shit about what goes on in knocking shops or hotel rooms, provided it's not shoved in their faces. All this is of course assuming the committee does eventually opt to back the Nordic model, which isn't looking very likely so far.

Thanks, I think we can all agree that pretty well sums it up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 14/09/2016 at 6:17 PM, Carnival said:

I see that Nordic Model Now are asking their supporters  to lobby their MPs to ask them to vote for a chair who "must be female and should have experience in the field of male violence against women and girls."

Here is their template letter:-

Dear [MP’s name]

I am writing to express my serious concerns about the Home Affairs Select Committee’s interim report on its prostitution inquiry.

When the interim report was released in early July, campaign group, Nordic Model Now! published a response setting out its bias, including:

  • It failed to recognise the serious harms of prostitution both to those who are in it and to the wider society and that nothing can make prostitution safe.
  • It failed to mention the UK’s binding obligations under the Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, especially Women and Children (known as the Palermo Protocol) to tackle both the demand for prostitution and the poverty and inequality that together drive sex trafficking.
  • It failed to consider the impact of prostitution on equality between the sexes in contravention of the UK’s binding obligations under the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW).
  • It ignored important recommendations about how to improve protection of children.
  • It wrote off the evidence from a large number of women’s organisations, survivors of prostitution, and other individuals who argued for the Nordic Model, incorrectly labelling them “emotive” and based on “moral” judgements.
  • It insisted – against all the evidence and common sense – that prostitution and sex trafficking are completely separate issues.
  • It did not accept the internationally agreed definition of sex trafficking and the implications of this definition.
  • It ignored evidence that sex buyers are more likely to be sexually aggressive than other men and so any increase in the numbers of men buying sex is likely to lead to higher rates of rape and sexual violence generally.
  • It dismissed evidence of the success of the Nordic Model (also known as the Sex Buyer Law).
  • When discussing the Nordic Model, the report quoted more than five times as many individuals and organisations that opposed the approach as favoured it, even though some had clear vested interests in the sex trade and some of the quotations were based on conjecture and not evidence, and at least one was based on entirely fabricated information.
  • It uncritically accepted the purported success of the New Zealand approach (which fully decriminalises all aspects of the sex trade, including pimping and brothel keeping) and ignored evidence that it has not in fact made the lives of women in prostitution safer or better and has led to an increase in child prostitution and sex trafficking.

For more about what was wrong with the interim report, please see Nordic Model Now’s full response at https://nordicmodelnow.org/2016/07/17/response-to-the-home-affairs-select-committees-interim-report-on-prostitution/.

Eight out of the eleven committee members were male and prostitution has a very different impact on men than on women. Men make up 99% or more of the buyers. Women and girls on the other hand make up the vast majority (80% or more) of those who are bought and sold. And when the buying and selling of one woman is legitimised, it implies that any woman, anywhere, can be bought and sold, reducing her to a commodity.

We now know that the inquiry chair, Keith Vaz, is someone who buys sexual access to vulnerable young people. The Times reported on Saturday 10 September that he said about one of them that “Someone will need to break him tonight.” Vaz’s conflict of interests goes some way to explain the extreme bias of the interim report. It does not, however, explain why all of the other members signed it off.

I am therefore writing to call on you to back the Nordic Model Now! demands:

  1. The interim report must be scrapped.
  2. All members of the inquiry must make a declaration of their sex buying history or step down.
  3. At least 50% of the members of the inquiry must be female.
  4. The chair must be female and should have experience in the field of male violence against women and girls.
  5. All evidence must be weighed against our obligations under the Palermo Protocol and CEDAW.

I also call on you to back the Nordic Model as the only human rights-based approach to prostitution. This decriminalises those who are prostituted, provides services to help them exit, and makes buying human beings for sex a criminal offence, in order to reduce the demand that drives sex trafficking.

Please write to the Home Secretary on my behalf to ask her to address the demands laid out above and to call for the implementation of the Nordic Model in England and Wales.

Yours sincerely

I wonder if there is any way in which a collective response to and critique of this letter could be circulated to MPs before they vote for the new chair. Perhaps from the ECP or from one of the teams of academics who are dedicated to serious academic research into sex work and sex workers.

 

 

Well, a starter response would be something along the lines of pointing out that their bullet points can be condensed quite considerably into "The interim report did not agree with us". The point re: sex trafficking and prostitution being separate issues is obviously biased...they're separate in every other type of trafficking. People are trafficked anywhere that a 3rd party can make money from another person's forced labour...common sense tells me that they ARE separate. Women do work as prostitutes independently, ergo trafficking is separate. Just as it's separate to those who are working voluntarily in fruit picking - even though many are trafficked.

The report did not "dismiss" evidence of the "success of the Nordic model" - it just didn't agree with them. Again - their complaint is that the report didn't agree with their standpoint.

I would agree that a person who uses prostitutes should not be the chairperson...but neither should that person be someone who fulfils their criteria, which pretty much guarantees that they'd be biased in the other direction. In all fairness I'm sure that Nordic Model Now, have no problems with the "Shifting the burden" report which was chaired by Gavin Shuker and Fiona MacTaggart....if they're challenging the bias of The Home Affair Select Committee report then why are they silent on the obvious bias in the "Shifting the Burden" report? Gavin Shuker and Fiona MacTaggart were clearly never going to chair a report saying anything other than "create a sex buyer law".

5 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh and further to my previous post, another point to note is that it's the Home Affairs Select Committee...not the prostitutes committee. The Nordic Model Now letter appears to be setting the group up as if it's a single issue committee. It's not...and even if it was the sole purpose of the committee, the mantra of "prostitution equals violence against women" should not be effectively built in as a presupposition, which is what would happen if the chairperson had "experience in violence against women". It's instantly assumed that the antis are correct in one of their fundamental narratives.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At least the Nordics will have to face unto the issue of male prostitutes. Given their keenest for equality of the sexes their views should be interesting

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yvette Cooper MP was elected as Chair of the Home Affairs Committee on Wednesday 19 October 2016.

Byron Davies, Tory MP for Gower, was appointed to the Committee on 31 October 2016, presumably as a numerical replacement for Keith Vaz..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/21/2016 at 6:32 PM, tugg said:

At least the Nordics will have to face unto the issue of male prostitutes. Given their keenest for equality of the sexes their views should be interesting

Actually In Sweden prosecutions of punters only ever take place in the context of male punters engaging with female clients as the other 3 possibilities do not indickate a power imbalance between the parties and if you believe that you will believe anything!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Carnival said:

Yvette Cooper MP was elected as Chair of the Home Affairs Committee on Wednesday 19 October 2016.

Byron Davies, Tory MP for Gower, was appointed to the Committee on 31 October 2016, presumably as a numerical replacement for Keith Vaz..

Mrs. Balls had to be told take out the part of her speech to the Last Labour Party conference prior to GE 2015 relating to her determination to push through criminalse the punters legislation when in Government!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, SlickWilly said:

Mrs. Balls had to be told take out the part of her speech to the Last Labour Party conference prior to GE 2015 relating to her determination to push through criminalse the punters legislation when in Government!

Well in the unlikely event that Labour win the next GE under Corbyn, there is absolutely no chance that she will be allowed anywhere near the reins of power.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 14/09/2016 at 5:10 PM, Coventrypunter said:

what a depressing herd of cockwombles.

If you ignore her politics, Caroline Flint is quite attractive?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0