Ms Monica O'Connor:

Thank you, Chairman. It is quite difficult to come in at this stage when much of the discussion has already taken place, and I hope members will forgive me if I repeat anything that has already been covered. I am grateful for the opportunity afforded to me and my colleague, Dr. Jane Pillinger, with whom I co-authored a research paper entitled Globalisation, Sex Trafficking and Prostitution, to present to the committee. Several speakers referred to the lack of research in this area. In fact, our research gives a very comprehensive review of both trafficking for sexual exploitation and the prostitution regime as it currently exists in Ireland. The research has been validated by the Garda and the figures contained therein are very accurate. It is our estimate that some 1,000 women are being purchased for sex at any given time in Ireland.

I propose to confine myself today to some observations on the role of government in regard to this very contentious issue. There are two main approaches taken by governments internationally. Under the first approach, which is taken by a large number of countries, the state regards the demand for the purchase of a person for sexual gratification as legitimate, acceptable or, as Dr. Whitaker described it, inevitable. Leading from this position is the notion that government should regulate and legislate to provide a legal and regulated market in which this particular consumer demand is met. In other words, the state has a capacity and duty to protect the rights and welfare of girls and women who are made available to meet that demand. This approach is probably best represented within the European Union by the Netherlands and Germany. The stated aim of the Dutch law, for example, is to ensure that all trade in sex is "desirable" prostitution, provided only by adult, free, independent sex workers in legal locations. The objective is to avoid "undesirable" prostitution by removing elements of coercion, force and associated criminality, such pimping, child prostitution, organised crime and trafficking.

In my view, the evidence overwhelmingly shows that, ten years on, this approach has been a complete failure in the Netherlands. The growth of the legal sector has reached unmanageable levels, with approximately 1,700 brothels and location-bound premises and an estimated 25,000 prostitutes serving a population of 16 million. At the same time, the notion that the provision of a safe legal sector would remove the need for an illegal sector has been wholly disproved. All of the research, backed up by the evidence of Dutch police, indicates that the illegal sector in Holland is as large, if not larger, than the regulated sector, and that associated organised crime is out of control. Moreover, despite the fact that a key objective of the new regime was that it would function as an anti-trafficking measure, the number of trafficking victims is, in fact, increasing. The 2007 evaluation, which is very comprehensive, found that pimping was widespread.

It is very important to note that the pressure to regulate and legalise in the first place does come from a desire to safeguard the welfare and rights of sex workers. Sadly, however, the evidence is increasingly more robust that prostitution is not a solution to women's poverty and economic need. On the contrary, it exacerbates that need. Women's welfare is very low down on the list of priorities for the main players in the market, namely, pimps, sex business owners and organised crime. Ten years after the introduction of the new regime in Holland, the evaluators conclude that the emotional well-being of women is lower than it was prior to legalisation on all mental health indicators. Despite a commitment in the law to ensure exit routes for women, only 6% of municipalities are compliant.

A similar approach has been taken in Germany, the view being that prostitution should be treated as legitimate work. Again, the idea was that those engaged in prostitution would be able to access legal entitlements, protection and health care. That approach has now been deemed to have failed utterly. In her latest book, Debra Satz argues that some markets are inherently noxious. It is my view that governments should have no role in legitimising a noxious market.

The second approach to the issue of prostitution is the Swedish one. A decision was made in that country that the demand for the purchase of sex which requires making available a certain number of women and girls is not an acceptable, legitimate demand, not a legitimate market and, moreover, that such a market undermines gender equality. That was the perspective from which the Swedes came at the issue. They also rejected the notion that the state should seek to control this type of market. Much of the discussion regarding the Swedish model has focused on whether it has been a success or a failure. The International Labour Organization is very clear in its position that Sweden has had the greatest success in this area, with its sex trade sector now a diminished, tiny market in comparison with those in similar jurisdictions. In Denmark, for example, the market is three to four times larger despite its population being only 5.3 million. In Germany, according to the economists at the International Labour Organization, the sector is 60 times larger than in Sweden, even though Germany's population is only ten times greater.

If we are seeking to effect a reduction in demand and a reduction in the numbers of people in prostitution, the evidence of what will actually work is irrefutable at this stage.

The Nordic countries are moving towards a reduction and an elimination. They are not perfect. They have not eliminated prostitution at this point and I do not think the word "model" is as helpful as the word "approach". They have been moving over the last ten years towards an irrefutable position which is that they have a diminished and tiny market in comparison with other countries.

Finally, Senator White brought up the issue of the relationship between trafficking for sexual exploitation and prostitution. Two recent research papers published by the International Labour Organization have shown that there is a very clear correlation, which it has demonstrated and proven, between the scale of prostitution, that is, the number of people involved in prostitution, and the number of victims of trafficking and that the ratio is probably between 10% and 24%. In other words, regardless of the prostitution regime - such as regulation in the Netherlands or tolerance in Ireland - if there are 1,000 women involved in prostitution, at least 10% to 24% of those women would be deemed as having been trafficked for sexual exploitation.

Trafficking is not the only source of violence and coercion, however. A lot of the discussion today has focused on the fact that a lot of prostitution here is underground and indoors and it is critical that we look at more recent evidence regarding indoor prostitution. A recent study of over 200 women in Chicago, for example, showed that the levels of sexual violence associated with indoor prostitution are higher than the levels of sexual violence on the streets. There are certain levels of drug violence and physical violence on the streets but when discussing indoor prostitution, we should not assume that it is somehow a safer or more acceptable environment for women to work in.

As someone who has worked in the areas of sexual rights, reproductive rights and violence against women for most of my adult life, I believe and hope that all of us in this room are genuinely concerned about the rights of women in prostitution and women in general. However, it is incredibly naive and flies in the face of the overwhelming evidence to believe that we can make prostitution safe. It is an inherently harmful, abusive, exploitative and coercive industry. It would be very remiss not to examine that overwhelming evidence and I am very glad that this committee is doing so.