Part of Oral Answers to Questions — Solicitor-General – in the House of Commons at 10:30 am on 6th November 2008.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of Vera Baird Vera Baird Solicitor General, Law Officers' Department 10:30 am, 6th November 2008

No, I did not know that. However, I do not think that that is an inherent defect of the offence, and I am not sure that the two offences are identical. We prosecute those who control prostitutes for gain, so prosecuting people who pay for sex with a person who has been prostituted for gain goes with the grain of what we do already. We all know that a very high percentage of prostitutes are controlled for another's gain, so one might think that there is a 90 per cent. chance that any man who buys sex will fall foul of this law. We will have to design its finer points later, but we have every hope that it will make a significant difference and be a significant deterrent.

Embed this video

Copy and paste this code on your website


peter schevtschenko
Posted on 7 Nov 2008 6:27 pm (Report this annotation)

i pay for sex when i can afford to, its consenting indoor paid sex,if i fall foul of the new law then so be it! if gays are allowed to have sex in public toilets and parks then heterosexuals should be allowed to have consenting indoor paid sex.

i look forward to breaking the new law!

Peter Rogers
Posted on 26 Nov 2008 5:30 pm (Report this annotation)


I do not think you should look forward to breaking the new law as the consequencies for you will be very expensive. Although, it is unlikely that those convicted of visiting say, a so called "massage palour" are likely to receive a fine around £200 from most magistrates, there are other higher costs. These will be much increased costs for your household, motor and business insurance. You see, most high street insurers refuse to cover those persons with criminal convictions (other than motoring) - this applies to petty offences in the magistrates court. You may also have to declare such convictions to your employer or future employer. Be warned therefore, a criminal record seriously screws up you life.

peter schevtschenko
Posted on 22 Dec 2009 4:39 pm (Report this annotation)

thanks for your concern peter,
however i have no intention of paying a fine for indoor consenting paid sex,(what happens in private is no business of any politician or puritan.)
in addition there are many paedophile priests within the religious industry who should be prosecuted for abusing children,but the religious industry is still powerful enough that rich people turn a blind eye to all the abuses carried out in the name of religion

peter schevtschenko
Posted on 22 Dec 2009 5:34 pm (Report this annotation)

people who allow their dog to foul public places should be prosecuted as its against the law but as we've seen recently,if you're someone in a position of power you can get away with breaking the law.
what sort of message does that send out?