Christmas Silliness #5

The 12 isms of Christmas

Christmas Silliness #4

Send your own ElfYourself eCards

Sir Trevor McDonald!

A t-shirt I designed recently, I'm pleased with it!

It's actually on sale at

Yey!

Good Old Charlie Brooker

Old article, just about sums up my last few days...

There's a plague stalking the land and I'm terrified. But here's how to avoid Norovirus meltdown ...

Fear stalks the land; stalks my land at any rate. I've landed a starring role in my own personal horror movie: Day of the Norovirus. Gastric flu, the winter vomiting bug, spewmonia: whatever you want to call it, it's out there, somewhere, festering on every surface, waiting to infect me. Britain is diseased: a septic isle bobbing on an ocean of warm sick.
The media have had a field day, and to an emetophobe like me (someone with an uncontrollable, inbuilt fear of puking), this merely amplifies the terror. A headline such as "Vomiting bug spreads across nation" sets my pulse racing twice as effectively as "Mad axeman on loose".

Even worse are the war stories: vivid blog postings from survivors, gleefully describing the full extent of their biological meltdown. They're trying to outdo each other.

"I had to lie naked in the bath for three days, blasting hot fluid from both ends."

"Yeah? Well I vomited so hard, all the hair on my head got sucked inside my skull and out my mouth."

"Pfff - think that's bad? At one point I spewed with such force, the jet fired me backwards through a stained-glass window, and I literally burst apart on the patio, sending a geyser of vomit and crap 600 feet into the sky."

And if they're not online, they're crawling into the office to tell you all about them. While still infectious. If I was running things, it would be dealt with like a zombie outbreak: shoot all victims in the head at the first sign of infection, then barricade the windows till the end credits roll.

Worse still, it apparently strikes without warning. Infection takes 12-28 hours to come to fruition, quietly making its way to your small intestine, and, at first, you're none the wiser. The physical symptoms come on so suddenly, you only truly know you've got it when you suddenly spot a jet of vomit flying away from your face. And then you're locked in. It's like knowing the sun could explode at any second and being powerless to prevent it.

Naturally I want to avoid it like the plague, because it is a plague. And I've become an expert. Here's how to avoid it yourself.

Forget those fancy anti-bacterial handgels. They're pointless. Don't worry about breathing it in; unless you're unlucky enough to inhale a fresh droplet of sick or faeces (which can happen if someone explodes right beside you), you can still get away unscathed even if someone in your immediate vicinity comes down with it. It's not carried in saliva either. The one thing you must do is wash your hands with hot water and soap for a minimum of 15 seconds before putting them in your mouth, nose or eyes.

Easier said than done. Once you're aware of it, it's incredible how often you touch a shared surface, then your mouth, without even thinking. Say you pop to the newsagents and buy a bag of crisps: that door handle could be caked in sick germs, and you've just slid them down your gullet along with the salt and vinegar. Or you're in an office: you use someone else's keyboard, then eat a sandwich. Why not lick a toilet bowl and have done with it?

But even washing your hands is tricky. Take the workplace toilet. The door handle, the taps and the button on the automated dryer may all be infected. You have to turn the tap with your elbow, wash for 15 seconds (time it: it's longer than you think), then turn the tap off with the other elbow. Then you'll need two paper towels: one to dry yourself, and the other to open the door with on your way out. Unless you do all of this, you're doomed.

I've become an obsessive compulsive disorder case study, repeatedly washing my hands like Lady Macbeth on fast-forward, acutely aware of where my hands are at all times, what I've just touched, and where they're heading next. It's exhausting, like consciously counting every blink.

Yesterday, in an attempt to prod some sanity back into my life, I went to a restaurant. Eating out is insane: even if your chef is hygienic in the first place, unless he's devoutly following the paper-towel hand-washing routine outlined above to the letter he may as well wipe his bum on your plate. Nonetheless, I decided to risk it. Giving in to emetophobia would be like giving in to the terrorists, yeah? End result: I lay awake for hours last night, convinced that I'd start hurling any second.

There's one chink of sunlight for us emetophobes: we hardly ever actually vomit. There are various theories as to why, and it's all a bit chicken-and-egg: either we're so naturally hardy that vomiting is a rarity (and therefore more traumatic when it does occur), or we're so psychologically averse to it, we can will ourselves to stop. In fact, if I was on Heroes, that would be my superpower. A few years ago I caught a noro-style gastric nasty that made all my friends spew like ruptured fire hydrants. I lay in bed with cramps and a fever, battling extreme nausea for four days, and somehow didn't snap. Although what was happening at the other end of my body was another story altogether. Magic powers only stretch so far. That's why Superman wears rubber knickers.

Anyway, it'll blow over soon. The media have already got new scare stories to torture us with. In the meantime, if you're reading this on a bus, in an office, or at a shared computer, and you're eating your lunch - God help you. Now wash your hands.

Christmas Silliness #3

London Gay Men's Chorus: Coming Out at Christmas

Christmas Silliness #2

The 12 Days of Chavmas

Christmas Silliness #1

The 12 Gays of Christmas

It takes a rich man to pour such scorn on the poor

by Matthew Norman.

As the disability defiant Churchill would agree, an army must carry its wounded

Please don't take this the wrong way, by reading into it any witless cockney rhyming slang intent that isn't there, but the man behind this new assault on our benefit-dependent poor would appear to be a total investment banker.

Perhaps I do David Freud, architect of the White Paper on welfare reform, a disservice. Maybe, during all his years raising £50bn for the likes of Railtrack and EuroDisney, Mr Freud sat up night after night with the ProPlus, studying the issue until dawn broke over a lavish home far removed, we may guess, from the sink estates he claims he wants to salvage from workless despair.

And yet, by his own words, it seems not. "I didn't know anything about welfare when I started," he told The Daily Telegraph in February, "but that may have been an advantage... In a funny way, the solution was obvious." The special hilarity here, apart from the notion of any obvious answer to so ferociously complex a social conundrum, is how long he took to travel from absolute ignorance to omniscience.

Hired by the Works and Pensions Secretary James Purnell to address this small matter, it took him – wait for it now; just wait for it – three weeks to research and write his initial report. Admittedly by New Labour policy-creation standards, this is hardly a rush job. But by any more conventional measure, 21 days is on the brisk side for so monumental an intellectual challenge.

Still, let's not fall into that very trap by rushing to judge Mr Freud as a man prone to the lure of the simplistic. Indeed, writing in yesterday's Times, he touched impressively on the thinking behind the wizard wheeze of forcing long-term incapacity benefit claimants back to work. "Some of our greatest national heroes suffered from disabilities," he explained, "from Nelson with his lost eye to Churchill with his 'Black Dog' depression, to the physicist Stephen Hawking..."

So there it is. Should you happen to be one of history's greatest maritime warriors, or suited to safeguarding the country from Nazi tyranny while moonlighting as a Nobel literature Laureate, or the Lucasian Professor of Mathematics with rare insight into cosmology and quantum gravity, you really have no excuse for allowing a disability to keep you marooned on the sofa watching Jeremy Kyle.

It's the rest I worry about. For every Churchill manqué, Nelson wannabe and putative Prof Hawking, there may possibly (I haven't spent three weeks on this, so excuse the caution) be others who aren't up to much on the work front. They might suffer from crippling back pain, arthritis, or agoraphobia. Plagued by chronic depression, but denied the spur of having Hitler's army poised across the Channel, they might lack the motivation to clean offices or ask "fries with that?" in return for the minimum wage.

Or they might simply be too battered and bruised by the confidence-sapping, skills-denying residue of a shameful apology for an education to care less. Inevitably a portion of the millions subsisting on a benefit designed to make the unemployment figures more palatable are, to borrow from Mr Purnell, playing the system. And while we might argue whether their reluctance to work makes them lazy or inadequate, we surely agree that they are the walking (or slouching) wounded too; and that, as that champion of disability-defiance Winston Churchill would agree, an army must always carry its wounded.

This, it seems to me, is the crux of the debate. To Mr Freud it may be about gaining the entrée into the peerage or quangocracy men with untold bonus millions tucked away often crave. For Mr Purnell, who mollifies on the record while briefing the papers off it that he's one tough muthah with one gigantic cudgel, it's presumably about ingratiating himself with the Sun and Daily Mail with his summer 2011 leadership campaign in mind. For some of us, however, it's about clinging to what vestiges of a civilised society remain to us.

The fact that nothing significant will change – that this Bill will have its teeth filed down to the stumps by that gallant cabal of backbenchers who remember why they joined the Labour party in the first place – is not the point. Nothing important will change because in this area nothing ever does. Soon after taking power, in the week he chartered a 747 to Seattle for £700,000, Mr Tony Blair floated the intention to trim "workshy" single mothers' benefits by £11 per week. He earned a few nice headlines, and the reflex disgust from the centre-left that was also mother's milk to him, but the political price of such malevolence was too high, and the proposal was quietly buried.

This latest sub-Thatcherite, far right-wing political posturing may come loosely disguised in the raggedy cloak of stick-and-carrot philanthropy, but it would come at a higher price still. The wilful stupidity of the timing, with at least a million poorly paid jobs about to vanish, needn't detain us. The concept of punishing the poor for receiving the assistance that is their right, by making them dig the gardens of the better off, feels like a pastiche of the vindictive nihilism of the rock-breaking Alabama chain gang.

What stinks worse than the idea is the tone. From the pious, cruel-to-be-kind brayings of the Freud-Purnell pantomime donkey, every word emanating from the rear end, they seem confused into thinking that the jobless have a lesser stake in this society than the employed, and believe in the deserving and undeserving poor. To watch a minister with a plumply padded pension and a free widescreen telly and, of all creatures, an investment banker threaten those on £69 per week is to observe the unspeakable in pursuit of the unemployable.

The only way to address the syndrome of long-term dependency is through education. It requires massive, sustained public investment in buildings, equipment and, above all, teachers, and knowing that's not going to happen either the grown-up government accepts, as an unavoidable fee for a moderately civilised democracy, that some people will take liberties to secure as much each week as Mr Freud might spend on a bottle of claret, if he was pulling his horns in.

In the absence of schooling worthy of a developed nation, you turn a blind eye to the alleged scroungers not only because the risk of denying the more deserving their dignity is truly unthinkable, but because the lazy and above all the children of the lazy deserve some dignity too. What you don't do is further stigmatise the poor, the sick, the illiterate, the weak, the befuddled and the inadequate for the delight of tabloid editors.

"Love and work, work and love... that is all there is," said Sigmund Freud, and in a utopian world all of us would have oodles of both. Back in the world as it is, meanwhile, another of his quotes comes to mind. "If you can't do it, give it up!" he said. It's advice James Purnell would have done well to consider before unleashing Siggy's great grandson on his three-week crash course in welfare reform.

DAN Press Release

DISABLED PEOPLES' DIRECT ACTION NETWORK

PRESS RELEASE (3/12/2008)

DISABLED PEOPLE TAKE DIRECT ACTION IN CENTRAL LONDON TO PROTEST AND DRAW
ATTENTION TO NEW BENEFIT HARASSMENT

Instead of celebrating the International day of Disabled People today, we -
and our supporters - are in central London protesting against the
government's
"Employment Support Allowance" (ESA) and "Work Capability Assessment" (WCA)
which are replacing "Incapacity Benefit" (IB). This punitive economic attack
will hit thousands of the poorest in society, forcing them further into
poverty and a discriminatory job market, while thousands more are losing
their jobs due to the deepening recession.

A DAN spokesperson said: "If the government were sincere in their attempts
to help Disabled Claimants, they wouldn't be cutting benefits or adding new
hoops in the process. They would target discriminatory employers and fully
appreciate the difficulties those with Invisible and Fluctuating conditions
will have in the job market. This is a cynical exercise designed to move the
goal-posts in assessments and ensure that many will no longer qualify for
the benefits they have been legitimately receiving."

* Political and media spin - suggesting there has been significant
increases in Incapacity Benefit claims - is misleading. The DWP confirms
there has actually been a drop in IB claims since 2000.

* A much higher percentage of Disabled People than previously are now living
in the community and claiming benefits, rather than being institutionalised.

* A long hours / short breaks culture (instead of providing flexi-time or
work from home) makes it harder for Disabled People and those with medical
conditions to cope with employment.

* There is a lack of access to meaningful education and training for
Disabled People, leading to a lack of qualifications, job skills and
therefore decent jobs with adequate incomes.

* ESA and the WCA is an even more punitive benefit and assessment than the
previous procedure (IB). Claimants who fail the new assessment will lose
entitlement to Disability Living Allowance (DLA) as well as ESA.

I Bloody Did It!

I can't believe I've done it! I have completed NaBloPoMo 2008 and posted daily on this hippie blog and on my photography blog throughout November.

The Success! image above come from the funky typogenerator site.

You can see all November's photography blog posts and all November's incurable hippie's musings and rants blog posts.

It was really hard work at times, but a great thing to do as it has really got me back into the swing of regular blog posting again. Though I may have a few days off now!

Phew!


NaBloPoMo 2008

Mumbai in Mourning

From The Guardian.
India struggles to come to terms with the horror of the Mumbai terror attacks.

Bad Week for the BNP. Ha ha ha.

DEDICATED FOLLOWERS OF FASCISM

BNP's Annus Horribilis continues... After last week's leak of their
entire membership list on the web (See SchNEWS 656), the flak has
continued...

* In our previous issue we linked to a website publishing the
membership list, but this has since been withdrawn due to personal
threats of violence to the webmaster. But don't worry you haven't
missed out, it is still online at www.wikileaks.org.

* This week the BNP were evicted from their merchandise warehouse.
Rented by Excalibur - the trading arm of the BNP - it stored such
lovely merchandise as replica military medals, Enoch Powell t-shirts,
'Great White' records and Union Jack mugs. Their ex-landlord made this
statement: "Evans Easyspace was aware of renting a property to
Excalibur, but were not aware of its links to the BNP. We have now
terminated their agreement and they are moving out at the end of
November." In response the BNP have announced that they actually
decided to move to better premises.

* While the BNP membership list revealed a litany of police, prison
officers, soldiers and even vicars, it also contains two paedophiles
- who were jailed last week for sexually abusing two
fourteen-year-old girls.

* In desperation over the disclosure of their membership list the BNP
has been forced into hiding behind the much-hated Human Rights Act.
They've also been firing off dubious legal threats to the likes of
Indymedia. The letter sent to Indymedia by Lee John Barnes LLB
(hons), from the "BNP Legal Affairs Unit", threatens to take legal
action, on the basis of theft, data protection and contempt of court,
unless the list of members is removed. For more of LJB's hilarious
antics check out http://weloveleebarnes.blogspot.com.

* This week, all but two of the thirty-three anti-fascists arrested
at the BNP's Red White and Blue Festival in August this year (See
SchNEWS 643) have had their charges dropped. Over twenty were
arrested for violent disorder after the group tried to blockade a
road into the fascist's knees-up. Others were arrested for failing to
comply with police directions on the mass demonstration.

* For more Fashwatch info see www.searchlightmagazine.com and
www.antifa.org.uk.

More such stuff at schnews.

Latest Photography Blog Posts

Flickr Interestingness, Explore, Scout and fd's flickr toys

Signs

CameraPhone

Burma Campaign

This Afternoon

Bradfield Manipulated

Crookes Valley Park - Orton Effect

The World's Picture

Photo Friday: Food

In Demand (1)

In Demand (2)

Sewing

Sewing II

More From Bradfield

Women demand asylum from rape

Press release from Black Women's Rape Action Project
On 25 November 2008, International Day for the Elimination of Violence against Women, we demand that the UK government meet its international obligations to provide protection to women seeking asylum from rape and other sexual torture.

In June 2006, Black Women's Rape Action Project issued the "Asylum from Rape" petition demanding official recognition of rape as torture and persecution, and practical help for women to overcome the many obstacles they face in making their asylum claims. Thousands of people have already signed the petition including journalists Victoria Brittain and Caroline Moorhead, lawyer Gareth Peirce, actress Juliet Stevenson and poet Benjamin Zephaniah.

An estimated 50% of women seeking asylum in the UK are rape survivors. Women are spearheading the movement for asylum rights and exposing the hidden atrocities in the asylum process. This self-help activity has encouraged opposition from many quarters, including high level protests against the detention of children and vulnerable people. The "Asylum from Rape" petition is one way of informing people about who seeks asylum and why, and is a tool to demand change.

We are calling on all concerned UK and international organisations to endorse the "Asylum from Rape" petition.

• Whilst International courts recognize that rape is routinely used as a weapon of war and also as an act of genocide [1] , asylum claims by women seeking asylum from rape are routinely dismissed by the Home Office and the courts, flouting government guidelines, UK case law and international conventions [2] .
  
  
• Whilst the conviction rape for reported rape in the UK is an appalling 6%, racism and official contempt for those who are from other countries and vulnerable compounds the sexism all women are up against.
  
  
• Many women are accused of "fabricating" their account of rape. In other cases, sexual violence is dismissed as "simple lust" or "random acts" by "unruly officers", or women are told it is safe to live somewhere else in the country they fled.
  
  
• Many mothers are also suffering the unspeakable violence of being separated from their children who they were forced to leave behind when they fled to the UK. See their campaign here.
  
  
• Contrary to the government's own rules against the detention of victims of torture, over 70% of women in Yarl's Wood Removal Centre are rape survivors [3]. Some are imprisoned as soon as they claim asylum. The petition calls for an end to this "Detained Fast Track" procedure.
  
  
• Many are being sent back to further torture because they weren't able to put before the UK authorities the full evidence of the rape and violence they suffered or were arbitrarily dismissed when they did. Most of the few women who have been able to stay in touch with BWRAP and Women Against Rape, report being raped or tortured again. Many are destitute and some have been forced into prostitution to survive.
  
  
• Whilst only 7% of racist attacks in the UK result in a conviction, many women asylum seekers report increased racial violence, fuelled by government and media witch-hunts against so-called "bogus asylum seekers"
  
  
• On this fifteenth anniversary of the creation of the post of UN Special Rapporteur on Violence against Women, we urge the current Rapporteur Yakin Ertürk to intervene against UK government's policies which deliberately make women asylum seekers destitute and force women back to countries where they may face rape, other violence and even death.

Women in all of the above situations are available for interview. For more information, including how you can help, contact BWRAP@dircon.co.uk or call 020 7482 2496

1. In the coming weeks, three judges of the International Criminal Court in The Hague will decide whether Sudan's president will stand accused of masterminding the use of rape as a form of genocide against several ethnic groups in Darfur. [David Scheffer, "Rape as genocide in Darfur", Los Angeles Times 13 November 2008]
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-scheffer13-2008nov13,0,4968269.story

2. "Misjudging Rape - Breaching Gender Guidelines & International law in Asylum Appeals", BWRAP & WAR, December 2006].

3. Legal Action for Women's research into women's rights violations at Yarl's Wood Removal Centre. [A "Bleak House" for Our Times, December 2005]

Irene Fernandez Is Acquitted!

I posted yesterday about Dr Irene Fernandez, and have received the fantastic news that she has been acquitted!

source: tenaganita.net

IRENE FERNANDEZ IS ACQUITTED
Monday, 24 November 2008


The Kuala Lumpur High Court has acquitted Dr Irene Fernandez, co-founder and executive director of Tenaganita.

The first words as she was congratulated, Irene said, "I am free! At last I am free!"

A scheduled court appeals hearing, which was to last until Friday 28 November was today ended when Judge Mohamad Apandi Ali gave his decision and set aside her 2003 conviction and reversed the conviction and sentencing.

Minutes later, Irene walked out of the court-room, free at last, saying, “I’m relieved that there’s light at the end of the tunnel.”

“I spoke the truth (and now) the conviction has been set aside,” she added.

It was a day of double surprises. The defence lawyer, M. Puravalen had asked that the motion of appeal stay. Turning the Public Prosecutor Shamsul Sulaiman, the judged then asked if the prosecution opposed the motion.

“Having been served the type-written notes, and having thoughtfully studied the notes, I have decided in the interest of justice, that justice itself would not be served by opposing this appeal.”

“You do not oppose, does that mean that you concede the case?” the judge asked.

“We do not oppose the appeal,” was the quiet reply.

The defence then asked that the conviction and sentence be set aside. The came the final surprise. From the bench, the judge gave his decision. “In the light of the respondent and Public Prosecutor is not opposing the appeal, I set aside and reverse the conviction and sentencing.”

The court room erupted into continuous loud cheers which the judge had to wave down. It has been thirteen long years, too long for anyone to wait to have their name cleared by the courts. But Irene has finally found closure.

Surrounded by her family, friends, colleagues and supporters, Irene said that the rights of defenders must be upheld. Ultimately, it is the people that we work with – migrants and refugees – that have been handed this victory. There is also vindication in the work that Irene does, and the organization that she heads.

Finally, to Ms Moganambal, who is Irene’s defence lawyer – from Irene and Tenaganita –we thank you and we love you.

Dr Irene Fernandez

Dr Irene Fernandez is an amazing woman who has done great work promoting the rights of migrant workers in Malaysia. After publishing an article on the living conditions of these workers, she was arrested for 'maliciously publishing false news' in 1996. She was on trial for 7 years, found guilty in 2003 and imprisoned for a further year. Despite being released after this, her passport is held by the courts and, as a convicted person, she was barred from standing as parliamentary candidate in the 2004 Malaysian elections. Despite her restricted civil rights, she carries on her everyday life and continues her work.

She was awarded the Right Livelihood Award, also known as the Alternative Nobel Prize, in 2005.

Her appeal is due to start today, the 24th November 2008, and the petition below is demanding a return of her rights, and those of other human rights defenders.

Please read on, and sign.

From the Global Sisterhood Network.

Dear Friends,

We have drafted a petition letter for Dr. Irene Fernandez's freedom.

Dr. Fernandez is a staunch human rights activist and is the director
and co-founder of Tenaganita, a Malaysian NGO that promotes the rights
and welfare of migrant and agricultural workers. She is also a
Steering Council Member of Pesticide Action Network Asia and the
Pacific (PAN AP) and the People's Coalition on Food Sovereignty
(PCFS), among many organisations. In 2005, she was given the Right
Livelihood Award for "her outstanding and courageous work to stop
violence against women and abuses of migrant and poor workers".

In 1995, Dr. Fernandez published a report on the living conditions of
migrant workers in Malaysia's detention centres. She was charged with
'maliciously publishing false news' against the Malaysian government
in 1996. After seven years of trial, the longest in Malaysian judicial
history, she was found guilty in 2003. She was allowed bail pending
appeal. Her civil rights are now restricted, but she carries on her
everyday life and continues her work.

The trial of Dr. Fernandez will resume on 24th- 28th November, 2008
and this may be the final round of hearings in the High Court in Kuala
Lumpur, Malaysia.

We call on organisations, institutions and individuals to support Dr.
Fernandez by signing the petition letter which is addressed to the
Malaysian government and other institutions in Malaysia, and is posted
at foodsov.org/.

By signing the letter, you and your organisation or institution will
appeal for justice and rights of human rights defenders like Dr.
Fernandez and it may give her the freedom to continue her work with
migrant workers as well as helping communities achieve genuine
people's Food Sovereignty.

Please circulate widely.

Thank you.

Sincerely,
Norly Grace Mercado
PCFS Secretariat

See also heart's post on Irene.

It's All True. Mwa ha ha ha ha.

Also, the cat with two faces is ridiculously cute.

Penalising the Punters

This is one of the only articles I have found which is positive about Jacqui Smith's proposals to criminalise men who buy sex from women who are controlled by a pimp. She has had to field some real hostility to the proposals and, from what I have seen, has stuck to her arguments and reasoning and is refusing to compromise. Good on her, we need more of that.

These proposals becoming law could make a huge difference to women trafficked, forced and manipulated into prostitution, and would be a great start to creating justice for women in this country.

Penalising the Punters

The home secretary has caused a storm with plans to change prostitution laws. She tells Julie Bindel why she is following the global trend to target men who buy sex

When I meet the home secretary, Jacqui Smith, on Wednesday afternoon, she is at the centre of frenzied press attention. She has just announced planned legislation to target those who buy sex from trafficked women, and though she has been talking about the subject all day, she shows no signs of flagging. She tells me she is "very proud" to have taken this step. I ask what motivated it. "I thought it was important to continue to look at the way in which we tackle prostitution," she says, "and we had not, until this point, looked at the impact demand has made on the sex industry." She explains that demand is one of the main reasons so many women are involved in the sex industry, including those who have been trafficked here to service the market. "We need to send out a message to men and to society in general, that most women do not choose to be in prostitution, whereas the buyers have free choice."

The proposals follow a six-month governmental review of the demand side of the sex trade. It should soon be a criminal offence to pay for sex with someone who is controlled for another person's gain - and it will be no defence for buyers to claim that they were unaware that a person was trafficked, pimped, or debt-bonded to their drug dealer or landlord. Kerb crawlers will also be penalised more than they have been: police currently have few powers to deal with a kerb crawler on a first offence, but the expected new law will remove the need to prove repeat violations. Police will also be given powers to close premises associated with sexual exploitation.

An estimated 80,000 women are involved in street, escort and brothel prostitution in the UK. According to government statistics, 4,000 women and children have been trafficked into prostitution in the UK at any one time, but the police suggest the real figure is far higher - studies have found that at least 70% of women working in UK brothels are trafficked from places such as Africa, Asia and eastern Europe. The fact is that a thriving sex industry, left to operate largely without government or police interference, is naturally a green light for traffickers keen to make easy profits in a welcoming environment.

The proposed new legislation has attracted both approving and angry attention from commentators, but one of the interesting aspects of this move is that it reflects an international trend. Lithuania and Finland both have laws similar to Britain's new approach, making it illegal to pay for sex with a trafficked woman. In Norway - where procuring, pimping and human trafficking are already illegal - the government is in the process of introducing legislation that will outlaw the buying of sex, but not the sale. This follows the lead set by Sweden, which criminalised all buying of sex almost 10 years ago, after a feminist campaign prompted by the suspected murder of a street prostitute called Catrine da Costa. The law prohibiting the purchase of sexual services in Sweden came into force in 1999 as part of the larger Violence Against Women Act, with the parliament defining prostitution as a serious form of male violence against women and children - harmful not only to the individuals involved, but also to society at large.

When this law was introduced, there were an estimated 2,500 women in prostitution in Sweden. Today there are around 500. And what is particularly impressive is that the number of women trafficked into Sweden is now between 200 and 500 a year - the lowest tally in Europe. Some anti-prostitution activists in the UK are disappointed that Smith has not followed Sweden and criminalised paying for sex in all circumstances. I ask why she has taken what might look like a half measure, and she cites a recent Mori poll which found that the majority of people do not support a blanket ban - but well over half agreed that paying for sex with a trafficked woman should be criminalised. "It is best to go with the grain of public opinion," she says, "rather than try to do something which may be met with resistance at this moment."

Another country that has targeted punters is South Korea. Here, the move towards criminalisation began in 2002 after brothel fires in which 14 women died - it transpired that the brothel doors had been locked from the outside by pimps and were only ever opened to allow buyers entry. In 2004 the South Korean government criminalised the demand side of the sex trade, with punters facing a year in jail or a fine if caught paying for sex. This has massively reduced the sex trade in a country where prostitution once brought in an estimated $21bn a year - 4% of the gross domestic product. Now the red light areas are largely deserted, and bed spaces in the many government-funded refuges for former prostitutes are usually full. (The South Korean government has dedicated substantial resources to helping women leave the industry, something Britain has yet to do.)

Even the Dutch - long notorious for their legalised brothels - are moving towards increased regulation of prostitution. For years, the story given by the Dutch was that legalising brothels had been a solution to the myriad problems associated with the sex industry. Then last year, Amsterdam mayor Job Cohen admitted that legalisation had been a failure. "We want in part to reverse it," he said, "especially with regard to the exploitation of women in the sex industry. Lately we've received more and more signals that abuse still continues." Members of the UK government visited Amsterdam in 2007 as part of the demand review, and did not like what they found. "Ministers came back clear that the problems of illegality and abuse are not solved by legalisation," says Smith. "On the contrary, there were still problems with organised crime and trafficking." Many of the Amsterdam brothels where women pose in windows are now being closed by police, as are the street tolerance zones where men could once buy sex without threat of arrest.

As the Netherlands has found, legalisation doesn't seem to be the answer, and the reason for this international push towards criminalisation seems to stem, at least in part, from the experiences of other countries where the sex trade has been liberalised. In 1984, for instance, Victoria was the first Australian state to legalise prostitution, and the main arguments put forward for the move (including by pimps and brothel owners) were that this would sever prostitution from organised crime and make the trade much safer for the women involved.

The reality does not match that early promise, as underlined by the occupational health and safety advice that is handed out to women by states that have legalised the trade. Women are advised to pretend they have a stomach upset if a buyer "insists on anal sex without a condom"; they are told to be careful when injecting local anaesthetic into their vagina, as it can mask more "serious injuries". (The idea that anyone would inject anaesthetic into their vagina is a stark reminder of the trade's brutality.) Then there is the advice that women should "learn basic self-defence", "be aware some clients can be rough" and that, when visiting a buyer's home, they should check for signs of a planned gang-rape, including loud music and too many cars in the drive.

This suggests that legalisation has been far from successful in protecting women's health and safety, and there is also good evidence that it has failed to stop the illegal sex trade. There are about 400 legal brothels in Victoria, and far more illegal ones. This reflects the situation in Nevada, the only US state to legalise brothels, where the illegal prostitution industry is currently nine times larger than the legal one. The fact is that anywhere that liberalises prostitution quickly becomes a prime destination for punters - many more pimps will set up business there than are legally approved.

In the UK, Smith is bracing herself for more criticism from those who consider the new laws part of a "nanny state" approach to government. One man wrote on this newspaper's website that he was so appalled at the legislation that he would never again "vote for a female in ANY election, local or general". Smith laughs at this, and tells me that she believes she is doing the right thing.

"We are trying to get the vast majority of the law-abiding public to help protect vulnerable women," she says. "I am willing to accept that there are women out there who say they have chosen to sell sex, but they are in the minority, and laws are there to protect the majority. In this case, the majority of women in prostitution want to get out, and suffer violence and exploitation. If there are women who have made a free choice, there are more who have had no choice".

How I Spend My Days

Like, seriously. It's true! Oh, without the working bit.

Thought for the Day

"Forgiveness means giving up all hope for a better past": Lily Tomlin