A Bill has been raised in South Australian parliament to repeal parts of the Summary Offences Act and to introduce the Nordic Model to govern sex work in South Australia. The proposal takes SA in the opposite direction to other states.
The Nordic Model (NM) proposes to criminalize the client rather than the sex worker (SW), to increase penalties of up to two years imprisonment for a second offence for the client, and to provide pathways out of sex work and into other employment for Sex Workers.
We might do well to ask ourselves about the following before arriving at any conclusions;
Is the Nordic Model 'evidence based,' and is information gathered from overseas contexts reliable and unbiased? What problems would be caused by the introduction of the NM in South Australia? What are the gains / losses?
Economics
Sex Workers say that the Nordic Model will severely impact the income of sex workers. Pathways to other means of an equivalent income proposed by government are not specified in the legislation. Even if these measures were to be specified, would they be practical or immediate enough to provide food, shelter, health resources, clothing for those currently engaged in sex work and their families. Does the legislation increase the need for welfare support, or does it prevent people from supporting themselves economically?
Supporters of the Nordic Model tend to refer quite a bit to women from eastern European countries who are engaged in sex work in western Europe. But has it occurred to these proponents that the women themselves are economic refugees in the first place? Is the problem of 'economic disadvantage' being resolved by the Nordic model, or unwittingly cultivated and more financial hardship imposed through ignorance?
Consultation
There is zero support for the introduction of the Nordic Model from peer SW organizations Sex Industry Network Inc (SIN) / Sex Industry Decriminalisation Action Committee (SIDAC). Sex workers say they have not been consulted. It is interesting to note that the former receives funding from SA Health.
Information derived from overseas locations seems to carry a strong bias. The absence of specific social and economic context seems to be missing. It would seem that the French, Nordic or Irish experience may come with a bias against Eastern Europeans and lack consultation in its own context. Was research from a fair cross section of the community, or just from a vocal conservative minority?
Sex work has been decriminalized for many years in NSW, and in New Zealand. Both jurisdictions without negative side effects. More recent experiences belong to Victoria, NT and Queensland. Has reasonable unbiased information been gathered from these jurisdictions? Are we following the evidence, or are we looking for evidence to support a conservative theory? Why would South Australia head in a direction which is opposite to the majority of other states?
Safety
The Nordic Model will likely lead to sex workers concealing their activities (for the sake of the clients / business retention). Concealment carries risk. If there is a risk of violence, extortion, risk to health - where can the sex worker safely find help?
Where women are caught in cycles of domestic violence at home, which is usually driven by mental health, addiction, coercive control, generic violence there is a need for financial resources for the woman to be able to get out of that situation if she wishes. Sex work may at times be a means for some people to escape violence. If that opportunity is not provided by family or government with immediacy and in substantial amounts - then where do people turn? Hospital Psychologists, GP’s and mental health services close their doors and are generally at home having a nice supper when they are most needed?
Following the deaths of four women through Domestic Violence in S.A. in one week during November 2023, we may agree that current measures to protect women are inadequate? Sex work may not be a great answer, but if it works for some then who is an elected government (or other authority) to remove that option?
Human Trafficking, Rape and Assault will continue to be crimes with or without the Nordic Model. The driving factors behind violence; fear, control, addiction, mental health will continue with or without the Nordic Model in place
The decriminalization of sex work is supported by World Health Organization (WHO), and Amnesty International (AI). Australia is a signatory to the human rights commission of the United Nations (UN), which includes the rights of people who are disadvantaged to live with choice, dignity, and self-determination.
Disabilities
Sex workers provide services to people with disabilities and those in aged care. How does it harm anyone to provide a perfectly natural function that brings dignity, relief and self-respect to those who are disadvantaged.
It is not as though people in wheelchairs, or people with other disabilities, or people in aged care, can go out to places where they can meet others.
Practically sex may not be possible between two disabled / disadvantaged people, so there is a need for one able bodied person to help.
Would it be right to criminalise the elderly and the disabled for wanting sex?
Over-reach of power
Is it absurd that government believes it can legislate consenting adult sexuality. What do voters think? Regardless of your address it is highly likely that the neighbors in a home near you will be having sex tonight. Wahoo! It is a normal function. We don't need politicians metaphorically peering in windows to see if any money changes hands. No one wants that.
Do the good people of South Australia want to be thinking constituents, or obedient subjects of the Legislative Council?
The proposed introduction of the Nordic Model feels a lot like coercive control en-mass. The naughty thing is not the sex, but perhaps the coercive control. Is it just a sanitized corporate version of; “if you touch that you’ll get a smack, or you will go blind.” Are we being coercively controlled by a government "that has gone a bit far?"
Morality
A well-known British GP and social commentator, when asked to define misery, said; “misery is a lack of choice.” In other words, misery is an absence of freedom to choose. All reasonable people agree with an ordered and legislated society to prevent harm, but allowing people the freedom to choose where no harm is done to other living creatures is the basis of democratic freedom. Once you start taking this away, we are in big trouble. There are no winners in “A Nanny State.” It is not sex that is immoral - it is the unnecessary exertion of control that is immoral.
The Bill to repeal parts of the Summary Offences Act and to install the Nordic Model legislation is misleading. Its proponents are saying the Nordic Model is part decriminalization, but in fact it is the opposite of that. It is criminalizing the industry and causing hardship to those who can least afford it. It is not the sex that is immoral, it is the absence of truth that is immoral.
Our state parliament has a religious influence, and so do we as a church. There is more than one story about prostitution in the Bible - one being from Matthew 21 in which Jesus says; "the tax collector and the prostitute will enter the Kingdom of God ahead of you." Not because of their profession, but because they do not turn up with a self-righteous controlling disposition, knowing what is best for others, and misusing authority to make the lives of others miserable. It is not the sex that is the moral problem, it is the self-righteousness, control, and misuse of authority that is a moral problem.
Summary
If we don't want to live under the authority of a parliament who regulates our sexuality, it might pay for everyone to have an opinion on this matter.
Should the Legislative Council seek a sensible well-informed view that is in step with the constituency and work toward the decriminalization of the sex industry where all people are safe, dignified and democratically free? It will never be perfect and there are always exceptions no matter which side you take. But it is difficult to understand how there would be an increase in benefits by passing legislation in favour of the Nordic Model.
