GEORGINA BEYER (Labour-Wairarapa): It is obvious to members of the House that I support the bill in its present form. That is no secret. I say to Mr Brown that it is true that I have been a prostitute. I became a prostitute before reaching the age of 18. I was about 16, going on 17, when I got involved in the industry, somewhat against my will. I certainly support the 18-year-old age limit, because I have a deep belief that any age that is lower than that—I notice there are people of a contrary view, who want the age to be 16—is not good enough for me, in trying to put protections in place.

Prostitution is a reality of life; everybody in the House accepts that. It would be irresponsible of this Parliament if this bill did not proceed beyond the second reading, because the status quo would remain. Albeit that we hear there is something in the ballot that may come up, it would be years before we would see the like of this sort of legislation proposed in the House again, and that would simply not be the correct thing to do. I believe the Justice and Electoral Committee and the sponsor of the bill, Tim Barnett, have endeavoured to advocate change on behalf of those members of the public who have wanted to see some sensible human rights regarding prostitution afforded to prostitutes and their clients. I do not believe the bill is just for prostitutes and their clients. There is a much wider community that can benefit from the good that this bill proposes.

I respect the contrary views that people hold. Matters of this nature must be debated broadly and robustly, and I am very pleased to say that the debate tonight has been considered and not unreasonable. We have respected each other’s point of view. I say that because even the mind of someone like me, who would probably not be swayed to vote against this bill, is open to what other people may propose as possible amendments. Although I will probably disagree with Dianne Yates’ amendment, given her explanation of what she intends to do should the bill proceed beyond the second reading, other people may have different amendments. Perhaps I will put up an amendment or two myself—who knows? The point is, though, that we must see this through—at least to the Committee stage, I believe. So we should vote this bill through the second reading. Let us hear it all and make good, positive judgments, I hope, either one way or the other.

Prostitution is not a career choice that, I believe, people necessarily want to make, but there are people out there in society who would want to exploit those who are vulnerable enough to be coerced into the industry. Those people must be regulated and controlled in some way, and I believe that this legislation helps to some degree in addressing that issue. When it comes to young people under the age of 18 who may be coerced into the industry, there should be the toughest of penalties for those who do that. Prostitution is easy to get into. It is easy to enter the industry, but getting out—well, one might never get out. One might get out of the industry, but does it ever get out of one’s head? No, it does not—certainly not in my experience. It is there. I have now taken my experiences to be valuable life experiences, enabling me to know what I am for and against about the industry.

I congratulate the members in this House, all of those who have been involved with promoting this bill, and all of those who have been involved with expressing the contrary view. This has been a very healthy public debate, and I certainly hope it continues beyond this second reading. I support the bill.