How to respond to the UK Police and Crime Bill
NUM urges all community members and allies to submit a response to the UK Parliament opposing the introduction of the Nordic Model.
See our response here. Scroll down for guidance on your response. It is important to send your submission as soon as possible because they’ll be discussing the amendments soon so we want to influence the committee members ASAP.
The proposed amendments (linked below) introduce these 3 clauses to the Crime Bill:
· New Clause 1: Commercial sexual exploitation by a third party (NC1);
· New Clause 2: Commercial sexual exploitation (NC2); and
· New Clause 3: Victims of Commercial sexual exploitation (NC3).
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/cbill/59-01/0187/amend/crime_policing_rm_pbc_0326.pdf
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/cbill/59-01/0187/amend/crime_policing_rm_pbc_0317.pdf
Deadline for submitting a response is 13th May!
Guidance for submitting:
-
- Title: “Written evidence submitted by [Your Name or Organisation]”
- Executive Summary: Bullet points of your key points
- Introduction: Who you are and why you’re submitting
- Main Body: Numbered paragraphs with lived experience and factual evidence and hyperlinks to sources
- Recommendations: What you want the Government to do
- Conclusion: Restate your main message
- File Requirements: Submit as a Word file (.doc, .docx, .odt, .txt or .rtf). No PDFs, no images or logos, no macros. Under 25MB
- Email as an attached word document to: hooki@parliament.uk (the email address scrutiny@parliament.uk is unreliable).
Suggested points to base your response upon:
I oppose the introduction of the Nordic Model (a legal approach that criminalises the purchase of sex while claiming to protect those who sell it). In practice, this model has consistently increased harm for sex workers. Evidence from France, Northern Ireland and Sweden shows that criminalising clients forces sex work further underground, reduces workers’ ability to screen and refuse clients, and increases exposure to violence. The intention may be to reduce exploitation, but the result is more isolation, less safety, and deeper stigma for those most at risk.
I also oppose the proposed criminalisation of adult services websites. These platforms provide a crucial safety infrastructure for independent sex workers by allowing them to advertise, set boundaries, screen clients, and work without relying on exploitative third parties. Removing these tools would push many into street-based work or dependency on others, as seen in the United States after the introduction of FOSTA/SESTA. Banning these websites would not prevent exploitation — it would strip away one of the few tools that protects workers’ autonomy and safety.
In addition, I strongly object to proposals that would further restrict or censor legal pornography on moral or ideological grounds. Pornography is a legitimate form of adult expression, labour, and pleasure. Attempts to sanitise or criminalise consensual adult content because some find it uncomfortable undermine freedom of expression, and disproportionately impact marginalised creators, especially LGBTQ+ and disabled performers whose realities often fall outside the mainstream. Ethical adult content should be supported, not silenced.
I urge the Government and the Committee to listen to sex workers and adult industry professionals who are directly impacted by these proposed changes. Full decriminalisation of consensual adult sex work, not further criminalisation or censorship, is the only approach supported by public health and human rights experts worldwide. It is time to move beyond ideology and implement policies grounded in harm reduction, safety, and respect for bodily autonomy.
Key Facts & Supporting Links
1. The Nordic Model increases violence against sex workers
- In France, 63% of sex workers reported worse living conditions after the criminalisation of clients, and 42% reported increased violence.
Source: Médecins du Monde, 2018 – “What do sex workers think about the French Prostitution Act?”
- In Northern Ireland, violence increased after the Nordic Model was implemented, with no significant reduction in demand.
Source: Queen’s University Belfast, 2019 – “Sexual Exploitation and Sex Work Policy and Practice in Northern Ireland”
2. Criminalisation drives sex work underground, reducing access to safety and support
3. Adult services websites are essential safety tools
- These websites help sex workers screen clients, work independently, and avoid exploitative intermediaries.
Source: Sex Work Research Hub / University of Leicester – “Internet-based sex work”
- In the US, the shutdown of online platforms under FOSTA/SESTA resulted in loss of income, increased violence, and reduced access to safety tools.
Source: Hacking//Hustling – “Erased: The Impact of FOSTA-SESTA” (2020)
4. Full decriminalisation is supported by global human rights and health organisations
5. Decriminalisation improves health, safety, and access to justice
- In New Zealand (where sex work is decriminalised), sex workers report increased safety, better relationships with police, and improved working conditions.
Source: New Zealand Ministry of Justice – “Report of the Prostitution Law Review Committee” (2008)
- Decriminalisation is associated with reduced rates of HIV transmission, greater access to healthcare, and lower risk of exploitation.
Source: Lancet Series on HIV and Sex Workers (2015)
6. Pornography is a form of expression and should not be censored
- Legal adult content is protected by UK law and human rights frameworks, including Article 10 (Freedom of Expression) of the Human Rights Act 1998.
Source: Equality and Human Rights Commission – Freedom of Expression
- Attempts to restrict legal pornography disproportionately impact marginalised creators (LGBTQ+, disabled, non-mainstream kink communities).
Source: Woodhull Freedom Foundation – “Sex Work & Free Expression”
On Decriminalisation
- Decriminalisation is not radical — it’s evidence-based public policy.
- Every major human rights organisation agrees: decriminalisation saves lives.
- You can’t support public health and criminalise sex work at the same time.
- Decriminalisation gives workers the power to protect themselves.
- The evidence is clear — what’s missing is political courage.
On Pornography and Expression
- Sexual expression is not a crime.
- Not all adult content is for everyone — and that’s exactly why it matters.
- Pornography is art, labour, protest, fantasy, and pleasure — all protected forms of expression.
- Sanitising porn doesn’t make people safer — it erases identities and realities.
- The answer to bad porn isn’t banning porn — it’s creating better conditions to make it right.
On Adult Services Websites
- Adult services websites are not the problem — they’re part of the solution.
- Shutting down online platforms doesn’t reduce harm — it removes safety nets.
- The internet is how we screen, negotiate, and say no.
- Removing online infrastructure is like pulling the brakes off a moving car.
On the Nordic Model
- The Nordic Model punishes clients, but the consequences fall on sex workers.
- When clients fear arrest, workers lose control.
- Screening clients is the first line of defence — the Nordic Model takes that away.
- If the goal is safety, the Nordic Model fails on every front.
- Sex workers shouldn’t have to choose between rent and safety.
General Opposition
- You can’t protect sex workers by making their work more dangerous.
- Criminalisation doesn’t end sex work — it just ends safety.
- Policy based on ideology will never solve problems rooted in inequality.
- If the law can’t tell the difference between violence and consensual work, the law needs to change.
- Stigma kills — and criminalisation is state-sponsored stigma.
This is a huge opportunity for sex workers to be heard by Parliament!
