If you can regulate it, then you can ensure that certain working conditions are met and, in the case of drugs, ensure purity in the substance or in the case of prostitution ensure that the women (or men!) are all consenting, given health checks, a union etc… the general things most workers have. It’s much safer for all involved if it’s regulated.

And let’s not forget the crime caused by drugs and prostitution- Murder or assault for example. If there’s a cheaper, safer source of drugs or sex then people will choose it and any violent pimps or drug dealers will be put out of business. A flock of birds with one stone. In my opinion, it’s much safer when it’s monitored.

Because let’s face it, people are going to do it anyway. Trying to ban it is like trying to stop the tide.

I personally don’t take drugs or engage in prostitution, but I think these activities should be legal and regulated rather than going on in the underworld. That doesn’t mean approval, it means tolerance. As for abuses, they can more easily be stamped out if things occur in the open, surely?

It would never have entered my head to do what BoJo has done in banning alcohol, and I’m glad to see libertarian Tories against it. But we are the party which is wedded to individual liberty, just as we have always supported free markets and free trade.

Labour have proven beyond doubt that they have no regard for civil liberties, and the Tories mostly support them outright or oppose them only out of opportunism, not because of a fully-fledged principle of libertarianism (I use the word in its true sense, not that which has been hijacked by the far right). Only we will stand up to the usual bigoted scum at the usual “newspapers” and the poison they are trying to spread into our culture.

A fair point, but I wonder what percentage of factory workers or cleaners would say the same? Just because lots of people find a job unpleasant and would prefer not to do it, if it wasn’t for the money, doesn’t mean it should be made illegal.

Yeah, rather than making any further stupid and pointless laws (seems to be a favourite habit of the current administration), lets legalise prostitution for those who /want/ to do it, and prosecute trafickers and their customers using existing rape legislation.

Why? Are they better looking?

I dislike the phrase “PC gone mad.”

I concur. “PC gone mad” is the signature tune of the ultra tedious right-wing libertarian brigade. Let’s just argue the issues.

I’m not at all sure about things like the casino legislation.

I’m totally opposed to super casinos.

We have to step up and start fighting it, especially on the issues of minority concern such as the pornography proposals.

Oh Jeez . . .

Having sex with a trafficked woman forced into prostitution is already illegal, we don’t need more legislation to prosecute for rape, and criminalising “the oldest profession” hasn’t worked elsewhere and won’t work here.

We should follow the Greek and German models, legalise the lot, ensure basic standards are met and deal strongly with traffickers and those that pay for such services by treating them as what they are. Rapists.

Normal prostitution isn’t rape, it’s a choice, and a choice that’s been around for as long as records exist. For the most part, I don’t lie that, but banning it most certainly isn’t the answer.

In Brown and Harman we have a nightmare combination – the traditional religious puritan tendencies of Brown and Harriet Harman’s political correctness gone mad.

I dislike the phrase “PC gone mad” because it’s frequently misused and mis applied, but for the lack of an alternative phrasing, I agree with this. The killjoys, the puritans and the socially illiberals are working together, and while I’m not at all sure about things like the casino legislation, overall, you’re right, and we have to step up and start fighting it, especially on the issues of minority concern such as the pornography proposals.

Tony Greaves

Ah! The Government’s policy is to turn The Happiness Patrol into reality. That explains so much…