—is a vote to support the general principle of the bill.

On a point of order, Presiding Officer.

I thank Ash Regan for her courage, and I thank her incredible team. I also thank the survivors of prostitution who shared their harrowing stories with MSPs. Today, we vote as a Parliament for the principles of this bill to put an end to state-sanctioned torture of women and girls. The bill responds to evidence of serious harm—evidence from women whose lives have been shaped by exploitation and violence.

I speak today as someone whose views on the issue have changed. When I lived in the Netherlands shortly after prostitution was legalised there, I accepted the argument that regulation would improve safety and reduce abuse. Brothels were licensed and standards enforced to protect those selling sex. However, over time, I saw the horrific outcomes as they became apparent. Sex tourism increased, more women were being violated, organised crime became entrenched and human trafficking got worse.

Today, in my own region, there are pop-up brothels in towns, women are trafficked and there are alarming indicators of exploitation. We know that there are links between prostitution, grooming gangs and serious organised crime. In 2025, a Romanian gang was convicted in Dundee for trafficking, rape and sexual abuse connected to prostitution—those are not isolated incidents. As we have heard today, the central issue is demand. As Pam Gosal outlined, prostitution exists because men are able to buy sex, and because women and girls are raped and abused. As long as that demand is left unchallenged, exploitation and harm will continue. The bill seeks to address that reality directly by shifting responsibility away from the abused to the abusers—those who create the demand and those who profit from it.

Voices have been raised about prostitution being driven underground, yet that is not borne out by evidence from countries such as Sweden. Traffickers and pimps depend on visibility and access. Their profits rely on men being able to purchase and abuse women easily. Reducing demand reduces the scale of harm and exploitation.

Ash Regan pointed out that sexual exploitation exists because those with the power choose not to act. Liam Kerr and Pam Gosal challenged the argument that was laid out that the Parliament does not have the time to discuss the issue. Liam Kerr and Pam Gosal gave example after example of when time was made available at the beginning of the day or at the end. I am not allowed to say that the Scottish Government was lying, but it was a misrepresentation of the truth.

I thank Ruth Maguire for her intervention on Maggie Chapman, because we were cringing at her speech. My colleague said that it was just offensive, but we cringed when we listened to Maggie Chapman eulogise sex work. Ruth Maguire asked whether, if it is the case that sex work is work, we should set up work experience. She showed how ridiculous Maggie Chapman was being.

Rona Mackay tried to intervene several times, and I say to her: violence from prostitution is not a myth.

Finlay Carson (Galloway and West Dumfries) (Con) rose—

A vote for this bill at stage 1—

I am afraid that I will not take an intervention from my colleague.

I thank Rhoda Grant, because she made us pause for a moment. She asked the question: if this was your mother, sister or daughter, how would you feel? As my colleague Stephen Kerr said, is this a country we want to bring up our daughters and granddaughters in?

The SNP has been in power for two decades. Fergus Ewing said today that it has become a nest of fearties, and I agree with that. The Government’s argument has been destroyed today. The SNP Government condemns violence against women and girls, yet prostitution is a form of violence that it has never tackled in legislation.

The bill would reduce demand, disrupt organised crime and, crucially, provide a framework of better support for those who want to exit prostitution. It is supported by a long list of organisations, including the Crown Office, Police Scotland and Scottish Women’s Aid.

Presiding Officer, the rules say that MSPs need to show respect to other MSPs. There is a conversation going on beside me, involving a cabinet secretary and a minister, while I am trying to listen to Ash Regan’s closing speech. I think that that is disrespectful.

Thank you. I hear you about the importance of transparency, accountability and spend. This is the first document that has brought those things together in one place, which makes it is easier to come back and ask questions.

I want to drill down into one specific line: item 31, on violence against women and girls. I am looking at the sheet in front of me. On violence against women and girls, the work has a score of 1, which is “exceptional”. That row has scores that are all exceptional or positive. When I look at that in relation to the performance on equality and human rights for women, I see a disconnect, given the current reality for women and girls in Scotland. Are you saying that you view the fund for the 100 or so organisations that you are giving the money to as exceptional or that the outcomes in terms of tackling violence against women and girls are exceptional? I would like to understand that in more detail.

I hear you, cabinet secretary. Thank you for that clarification, because when organisations look at this, they just go, “Oh my goodness, the Scottish Government is marking its own homework.”

My next question is linked to that budget sheet, which people are looking at in terms of outcomes. One of the criticisms of the equalities fund is that it is very siloed and does not work across the different cabinet secretaries’ portfolios. Last week, on 21 January, in a debate that started off in the Education, Children and Young People Committee, a criticism was raised about the Scottish Government funding of LGBT Youth Scotland.

You said that every pound that is spent has to have the greatest possible benefit, and I agree with you on that. Can you confirm whether you are content for the public money that is spent on LGBT Youth Scotland to go to an organisation that helped to draft the “Supporting transgender pupils in schools” guidance, despite professional warnings of safeguarding risks, parental exclusion and legal exposure for schools, and in the light of the fresh safeguarding allegations now facing LGBT Youth Scotland? Is that money well spent, cabinet secretary?

But you oversee it.

That is fine. We will give you a copy of the Sunday Post. Thank you.