I commend Ruth Maguire for bringing this important debate to the chamber. I agree entirely and whole-heartedly with the contents of her speech. I also commend A Model for Scotland for the work that it has done on this important topic in the past wee while. I read its report with interest a month or so ago. I thought that it was very good and that it helpfully set out information on the international context. I also commend the Parliament’s cross-party group on commercial sexual exploitation for all its work on the topic.

A Model for Scotland’s report is about international insights. The international context is important and instructive for a country that is considering changing the law on the issue. The aim of the United Nations Palermo protocol is

“to prevent, suppress and punish trafficking in persons, especially women and children”.

It says that

“States ... shall adopt or strengthen legislative or other measures ... to discourage ... demand”.

Article 6 of CEDAW says that states shall take all ... measures, including legislation, to suppress ... exploitation of prostitution”.

Again, one aim of the Council of Europe Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings is “to discourage the demand”. Reducing demand is therefore the key part of that approach. Prostitution and trafficking are linked. Prostitution creates a market that traffickers then strive to fill. Reducing demand by creating a legal framework that diminishes it as much as possible is therefore imperative.

Sweden showed us the way on that. It was the first country to criminalise the purchase of sex with a view to achieving such suppression of demand. In the 20 or so years since then, other countries have followed suit—I think that it is up to around eight now. That gives us more data to examine and more experience to watch so that we can see how a country such as Scotland might be able to follow it.

The report mentions Sweden, which I visited when I was looking into the issue a few years ago. I remember prosecutors there explaining to me that, although they were very proud of their law—and rightly so—on reflection, they felt that there was no way to escalate penalties. Someone who had been caught a number of times would get the same fine each time. The report says that Sweden has now updated its minimum penalty, which I note with interest is now imprisonment.

The Scottish Government has a position on the issue. Its “Equally Safe” strategy notes that prostitution is violence against women, which is the position that many of us in the chamber would take. The problem with that is that “Equally Safe” has represented the Scottish Government’s position for more than 10 years but, unfortunately, the law has not been updated to reflect that.

I take some personal responsibility for that—as many members will know, for a number of years, I was the minister in charge of that area. It was a personal disappointment for me that I left office not having been able to change the law while I was a minister in Government. Unfortunately, I learned that the political will of just one person in a large Government is not enough, and it was not enough in that case. Ten years is too long, though, and it is not good enough that the issue has not been given higher priority.

I recognise that the Scottish Government has instead been focusing on other issues, some of which I consider to be detrimental to women, such as the discredited Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill. Seemingly, the Government has learned nothing from that process over the past year, and it is now considering introducing a bill to end conversion therapy. Even the proposed bill on misogyny that the Government is considering should be introduced only after legislation is undertaken to update the position on prostitution law, because prostitution is misogyny in action.

Members might not be aware that I plan to introduce a member’s bill on the topic this year. I am finalising my consultation, which I hope will be out in the next few weeks. I would be happy to discuss that with any member, and I hope to receive cross-party support for my bill.