This is clearly sense, as is the situaion in NZ, but I believe that the legislation that is adopted can be down to the success or otherwise of the groups and organisations pressing for liberalisation.
While I am very much against street prostitution, such happenings arranged between two consenting adults, for an agreed fee and taking place behind closed doors should be a matter for them and not for silly legislation that seeks to criminalise the act.
After all, what's the difference between booking a WG for an hour, and being lucky enough to pick a girl up at a bar or club, take her home and shag her brains out for free? Money. And do we really need such legislation for a financial transaction? I think not.
Too many in high places have rolled over and let the likes of Ms Harman and Ms McTaggart (no relation, thank god!) push their campaign along the road too far for too long. We live in a demoracy, and who is listening to the rights and needs of WGs who actually enjoy and welcome this type of work, and indeed the punters. For Harman and McTaggart, theirs is a moral crusade, where they cleverely and sordidly link, inextricably, drugs, pimps, trafficking and prostitution, after which they get on the PR bandwagon to make the public believe that the only way to cure these ills is by criminalisng men who pay for sex. While I am not suggesting there isn't a link, my view is that it's not as big and widespread as the anti-prostitution lobby claim.
Other countries, such as Switzerland, are dealing with the sex trade with designated areas, but here, such a suggestion receives as much flak as a plan o build a travellers site near your house.
While not as controversial as the HS2 project, the country needs to decide if its going forward with positive views and thinking on the how the age old problem is dealt with, or whether we return to puritain times, where even the smallest part of exposed breast in advertising is verboten ?