Ash Regan
Independent · Scotland
“To ask the Scottish Government, in light of the Scottish Police Authority’s recent quarterly policing performance report showing that sexual crimes have continued to increase, with recorded rape at the highest level since comparable records began, and with domestic abuse also continuing to rise, what its response is to concerns that its e…”
“To ask the Scottish Government what actions it is taking to reduce journey times and congestion for commuters travelling to and from Edinburgh and East Lothian, including measures to progress with the delayed upgrade of Sheriffhall roundabout and to improve transport reliability across the region. (S6O-05677)”
“They seek to define that role by reference to a qualification threshold, which I know that the Government mentioned in earlier stages of the bill’s progression. Amendments 12 and 15 would allow ministers to establish by regulation a licensing scheme for non-healthcare premises.”
“Whatever we think of that, I cannot see it declining over the next few years. New innovations come through every few months, and the number of first-time clients is growing. Therefore, Scotland needs to get this area right. Eighty per cent of the providers in this space are non-medical.”
“The level 7 qualification also required more than a year of structured study covering facial anatomy, complications management, clinical assessment and patient safety. She also maintains level 3 first aid, including anaphylaxis training. She told me, in her own words: “My clinic operates as a fully licensed premises.”
“From the reading that I have done so far on the subject, it appears that the Government does not know how many women, like the constituent I mentioned, it will be putting out of business or out of a job. I wonder whether the minister can cover that issue when she next gets to her feet.”
The complete record
Every one of 169 lines we hold for Ash Regan, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 4.
“To ask the Scottish Government, in light of the Scottish Police Authority’s recent quarterly policing performance report showing that sexual crimes have continued to increase, with recorded rape at the highest level since comparable records began, and with domestic abuse also continuing to rise, what its response is to concerns that its equally safe strategy is failing women and girls, including what urgent, measurable action it will take to reverse these trends. (S6O-05692)”
“To ask the Scottish Government what actions it is taking to reduce journey times and congestion for commuters travelling to and from Edinburgh and East Lothian, including measures to progress with the delayed upgrade of Sheriffhall roundabout and to improve transport reliability across the region. (S6O-05677)”
“Overall, my amendments would support a proportionate and workable regulatory framework that recognises competence and qualifications across the sector. I move amendment 11.”
“They seek to define that role by reference to a qualification threshold, which I know that the Government mentioned in earlier stages of the bill’s progression. Amendments 12 and 15 would allow ministers to establish by regulation a licensing scheme for non-healthcare premises. Those regulations could set minimum standards for premises and could specify which procedures it was permitted to provide. That would ensure that qualified practitioners and properly regulated premises would not be excluded simply because they sit outside traditional healthcare structures. Amendments 29 and 30 are consequential amendments that would ensure that regulations that were made under the proposed provisions would be subject to the affirmative procedure, which would mean that Parliament could scrutinise and approve the regulations at a later date.”
“From the reading that I have done so far on the subject, it appears that the Government does not know how many women, like the constituent I mentioned, it will be putting out of business or out of a job. I wonder whether the minister can cover that issue when she next gets to her feet. I feel that this is irresponsible law making and that, potentially, such businesses should be being compensated. If the legislation is going to result in business closure, at the very least, the Government should know how many businesses will be affected. My amendments in the group would ensure that the bill recognises appropriately qualified non- healthcare aesthetics practitioners and premises within the regulatory framework. Amendments 11, 13 and 14 would recognise non-healthcare aesthetic professionals in section 4.”
“But under the current drafting, the interaction between sections 3 and 4 of the bill means that permitted premises are effectively limited to clinics run by a prescribing doctor, nurse, dentist or pharmacist. In practice, that means that the ability to operate a clinic may depend on professional title rather than on aesthetic- specific training or experience.” My constituent is what we say that we want: she is someone who is responsible, safe, highly trained in her field and a responsible employer. However, because she is non-medical, like 80 per cent of the providers in the industry, she would not be able to continue her business—which she, like many other women, has built up and invested thousands in over the past 16 years—as it is.”
“The level 7 qualification also required more than a year of structured study covering facial anatomy, complications management, clinical assessment and patient safety. She also maintains level 3 first aid, including anaphylaxis training. She told me, in her own words: “My clinic operates as a fully licensed premises. I hold a skin-piercing licence from Edinburgh City Council. My business is fully insured, and insurance within the aesthetic sector requires practitioners to demonstrate appropriate training, treatment protocols, risk assessments and clear procedures for managing complications before any cover is granted.” Those safeguards are already a fundamental part of responsible practice in this field. She continued: “In the past year alone, I have safely treated 496 injectable clients in my clinic.”
“Whatever we think of that, I cannot see it declining over the next few years. New innovations come through every few months, and the number of first-time clients is growing. Therefore, Scotland needs to get this area right. Eighty per cent of the providers in this space are non-medical. I was contacted by a constituent, who I imagine is far from unusual in this context. I will put her story to the chamber, because she feels that, despite doing everything right, nobody is listening to her. She has been running her own clinic for 16 years, supporting herself and her young family. She also employs other women, many of whom are mothers with small children who want to work flexibly. She holds regulated Office of Qualifications and Examinations Regulation qualifications in aesthetic practice at levels 5 and 7, which cost her £15,000.”
“The Non-surgical Procedures and Functions of Medical Reviewers (Scotland) Bill seems to be a classic example of the way in which the Government has started to make law, which is that it sees that there is an issue and rushes into legislation while, unfortunately, listening to only one side of the argument. Often, it ignores women’s voices—we have seen that time and again—and it is entirely blind to unintended consequences. The majority of aesthetics customers—80 per cent, we think—are women, and the majority of providers are women. I make it clear at the outset that I want aesthetics services to be provided in safe, clean premises by qualified practitioners. However, I am concerned that that is not what will happen, should the bill be passed. We are all aware that aesthetics is a growing area.”
“To ask the Scottish Government how it measures success in protecting care-experienced children, in light of reports that its flagship policy, the Promise, has failed to keep vulnerable children safe. (S6O-05596)”
“To ask the Scottish Government what assessment it has made of any impact that withdrawing funding for Wave Energy Scotland from March 2026 will have on Scotland’s ability to leverage investment, including through horizon Europe, and on confidence in the marine energy sector. (S6O- 05571)”
“We have to earn their trust by focusing on their priorities, not on ideological indulgences, and by delivering measurable and accountable outcomes for the people of Scotland. We are not doing that, and the examples that I have given are just a tiny snapshot. I have not even had time to cover the Government’s callous and kamikaze on-going fight to use public money to keep violent males in the female prison estate. My considered view is that we are continuing to fund failure, and we should urgently address that.”
“Why are critical front-line services such as Glasgow and Clyde Rape Crisis struggling to survive while demand is increasing, but other lobby groups seem to be thriving financially while failing to deliver any meaningful improvement for those they claim to serve? There is no point in spending more money if it is not being spent well. I am very concerned about how public money is being allocated. If adherence to following the law is not a core funding condition, it must become one. We cannot afford further wasted public funds and reputational damage from embarrassing revelations such as those that we witnessed in the employment tribunal involving Sandie Peggie and NHS Fife. The costs of that are on-going and were about £400,000 as at December 2025. The public are not stupid.”
“The equally safe strategy that underpins the delivering equally safe funding model states that prostitution is violence against women. At a time when Scotland is facing escalating sexual crimes and escalating domestic abuse, the crisis of male violence against women continues. The Government is finding ways and looking for excuses not to act, either by not acting itself or by not supporting members’ bills on those issues. I presented a case showing that, using the Christie commission-type of evaluation, my bill would have saved the country money over time. Why are some funded organisations notably silent on tackling demand and criminalising perpetrators exploiting women in prostitution?”
“Further, we have organisations that are now steeped in controversy, such as LGBT Youth Scotland, that have received significant public funding. That organisation has received more than £13.4 million over the past 10 years, and yet, year on year, we are told that the inequality that it claims to tackle is worsening. Are we continuing to fund failure? What independent evaluation has been undertaken to assess whether such funded interventions are delivering on expected outcomes, or whether those organisations are, in fact, part of the problem rather than the solution? I will now touch on male violence against women and girls. The cabinet secretary has said that equally safe will receive more money in the budget.”
“Recently, five Government-funded charities— Engender, LGBT Youth Scotland, the Equality Network and Scottish Trans, LEAP Sports Scotland and Zero Tolerance—have been lobbying hard to create confusion in the aftermath of the For Women Scotland Ltd v the Scottish ministers case, on which the Scottish Government lost yet more public money after being challenged by For Women Scotland. Clare Adamson wanted us to talk about money that has been squandered, so I hope that she is listening. The For Women Scotland case cost £780,000. There was also the failed Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill and the court case to challenge the use of a section 35 order, which cost £370,000. In total, that comes to £1.2 million that has been wilfully wasted by the Government against public opinion.”
“Budgets provide an opportunity for the Parliament to scrutinise questions such as whether we are spending public money wisely or funding failure. I will use the few minutes that I have been allocated to talk about public trust and how—or whether— we are getting value for money. Trust depends on taxpayers seeing effective use of public money and measurable value for their money. There is a question about how ministers can properly assess effectiveness when substantial funding for equality and tackling male violence against women is channelled at arm’s length through bodies such as Inspiring Scotland.”
“To ask the Scottish Government what action it has taken since 2007 to address prostitution, including legislative measures aimed at tackling demand for paid sex as a means of preventing harm to vulnerable women and girls, and the provision of exit support services for recovery from any complex trauma resulting from prostitution. (S6O- 05530)”
“Sweden has the lowest demand for paid sex, it has world- leading HIV eradication, and it has strengthened laws to tackle online exploitation. That is not ideology—it is the evidence. Let us remember Scotland’s legislative history.”
“That is what the global sex trade fears: losing its market of misery for profits. The United Nations special rapporteur on violence against women and girls, Reem Alsalem, is clear that prostitution is incompatible with women’s equality. Legal frameworks that normalise the buying of sex entrench violence and discrimination. Her message is that we have a duty to address demand, rather than to manage exploitation. Sweden, Norway, Iceland, Ireland, France and Canada are all demonstrating positive outcomes of their laws. They have reduced demand, fewer people are in prostitution, they have improved safety and they have world-leading sexual health outcomes. In Sweden, there have been zero femicides in prostitution in 26 years.”
“I am sorry to say that, although the Parliament speaks eloquently and at length about equality, it is searching for reasons not to act where action is required. Inaction is not neutrality; it is a decision, and it has a cost. Dismissal of international evidence as being contested is not caution; it is intellectual laziness. The data exists if we choose to engage with it. Sweden pioneered the equality model in 1999, criminalising the purchase of sex while supporting exit and recovery, and men consistently report a fear of legal consequences as being the primary deterrent. No Nordic model country has ever reversed its position. Instead, those countries have strengthened their laws, expanded their support and refined their enforcement. Once a society decides that human beings are not commodities, it does not go back from that position.”
“Most women who are in prostitution entered as children, many of them from the care system and many already carrying the scars of sexual abuse, domestic violence and trauma. Surely the public expect us and the Government to do everything in our power to protect those vulnerable women and children, so why will we not do that? The UK Independent Anti-Slavery Commissioner has warned of a surge in trafficking, calling it a demand-led crime that grows faster than our ability to protect victims. This is a market where buyers believe that they are never going to be challenged, and that belief is our collective problem to solve in this place today. For nearly 20 years, inaction has allowed that belief that buyers have to harden.”
“Because exploitation is not going to wait for more reviews, more consultations or more Government strategies. The electorate did not send us to the chamber to observe the harms that are going on outside; they sent us here to act and to do something about that. Public support for the bill is strong, yet Scotland remains in the extraordinary position where protecting women and children from sexual exploitation was not a fully funded, year 1 priority for the Government, which, after 19 years in power, has still failed to act. The Government’s own expert adviser on grooming and child sexual exploitation, Professor Alexis Jay, said in 2018: “The big issue here is tackling the problem of demand.” The demand for sex with children is growing worldwide.”
“The Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service tells us that, although such offending often happens behind closed doors, that “does not mean … that the difficulties are insurmountable”—[Official Report, Criminal Justice Committee, 5 November 2025; c 2.] The Lord Advocate is unequivocal and has said that “those who purchase sex … are statistically more likely to perpetrate domestic abuse and other forms of violence against women and girls”, making this a matter of clear “public interest and societal harm.” The United Nations special rapporteur on violence against women and girls has stated plainly that prostitution “constitutes torture, inhuman and degrading treatment” and is an aggravated form of male violence, facilitated by demand. This bill is not out of time; it is overdue. Why do this now?”
“It would decriminalise those who are sold, recognising them as people who are constrained by vulnerability and not as offenders, and it would place criminality and accountability where they have never properly sat in Scots law: with those who buy sexual access and those who profit from the sale of sexual access to human beings. That is not radical. It would close a gap in the law that has existed for almost 20 years. Police Scotland is clear and is fully supportive of the idea that buying sex is a form of exploitation that should be covered by law. The majority of those who sell sex are vulnerable and most are at risk of violence and therefore should be supported, not criminalised.”
“Politicians might write bold strategies on prostitution, but they repeatedly fail to confront the root cause of sexual exploitation, which is, of course, the demand to buy sex. In the gallery today, and watching from home, are survivors who have tried time and again to be heard. They have submitted evidence, spoken to committees and attended parliamentary events, reliving their trauma not for themselves but to protect the next wee girl from what happened to them. Today, they have entrusted me with something profound: to be their agency, to speak truth to power and to ask this Parliament finally to act. I will be absolutely clear about what the bill does. My unbuyable bill recognises prostitution for what it is—a system of exploitation and violence that is sustained by demand.”
“The world is watching. As the Jeffrey Epstein scandal finally unravels, it exposes something that survivors and whistleblowers have been telling us for decades: that sexual exploitation does not persist because no one knows about it; it persists because those with power choose not to act. We must honestly ask ourselves today what Scotland can truly say that we have done. Have we listened to survivors, many of whom are in the gallery with us today? I am sad to say that, shamefully, very few in the chamber have listened to survivors. Too often, survivor voices have been drowned out by louder ones with platforms, enviable access to power and the presumption to speak over those who have lived experience.”
“I move amendment S6M-20611.1, to leave out from “followed by Stage 1 Debate: Prostitution (Offences and Support) (Scotland) Bill” to “5.55 pm Decision Time” and insert: “followed by Stage 1 Debate: Desecration of War Memorials (Scotland) Bill followed by Stage 1 Debate: Prostitution (Offences and Support) (Scotland) Bill followed by Motion on Legislative Consent: Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill – UK legislation followed by Committee Announcements followed by Business Motions followed by Parliamentary Bureau Motions 6.30 pm Decision Time”. 18:10”
“I urge the Parliament to grant us the necessary time for a full, thoughtful debate, to allow us to give the issue the right amount of time before members reach their decision. I am grateful to the bureau for listening yesterday and for extending the time slightly. However, I urge members to support my amendment and give the debate the time that it deserves.”
“Over the past couple of days, members from across the chamber have approached me to say that they do not think that they will be able to speak in the debate and that they desperately want to take part. That is deeply troubling, and it is not equitable, either. Over the years, we have had two- hour-plus debates on many bills. Recently, we considered the Assisted Dying for Terminally Ill Adults (Scotland) Bill at stage 1, when we debated—rightly—for more than four hours. Members’ bills deserve parity of esteem, and they deserve timing that is dependent on the breadth and depth of the debate. In my opinion, the sensitivity of the issue means that it deserves more time, not less. It demands space for evidence to be tested, for voices to be weighed carefully and for members to fulfil their responsibility to deliberate thoughtfully.”
“Let us be honest—this is not a new conversation that we are having. The approach has been Scottish National Party policy for many years, and members know that. It has also been established in the Scottish Government and Convention of Scottish Local Authorities’ equally safe policy for more than 10 years, and the direction of travel has been clear. The cross-party group on commercial sexual exploitation in its inquiry on the subject was clear that we must now move on from talking to acting. My unbuyable bill is not sudden, unexpected or rushed. We have a five-year parliamentary session, and we cannot again tell survivors, “Not yet, but soon”. That would be a failure for them and of this Parliament in acting for them. Public engagement on the issue is now intense.”
“There are women and children being exploited less than a mile from here and all across Scotland, and it is a growing problem. It is about violence, inequality, coercion and trauma, and it is about our children and women. The Parliament last legislated substantively on prostitution in 2007—nearly 20 years ago. Over the past two decades, survivors have organised, spoken out and repeatedly asked to be heard. Next week, their long wait will be over. They have shared painful experiences at the Criminal Justice Committee, at parliamentary events and in the media—often at great personal cost to themselves—in the hope that lawmakers in the Scottish Parliament will finally listen to them. After almost 20 years, I would think that the very least that we could offer them is a full debate and proper scrutiny by their elected representatives.”
“Through my amendment, I am asking the Parliament for something that should not be controversial: time—having the time to do our jobs properly by respecting the gravity of our task and acknowledging the reality of those whose lives are central to the debate. Having been involved in the member’s bill process after progressing many Government bills, I very much feel the lack of parity of esteem that is given to members’ bills. I believe that the Parliament should reflect on that for the next parliamentary session. Yesterday’s scheduling by the Parliamentary Bureau of 80 minutes for such an important debate shows the complete disconnect between the Parliament and public interest and survivor reality. This is not an abstract policy discussion such as the one on greyhound tracks, which are no longer operational in Scotland.”
“I have set out the steps that it is taking to provide protections for staff and patients who are accessing or delivering services in hospitals across Scotland. Walk-in General Practitioner Clinics 8.”
“The human rights of women and girls in Scotland are not complex. Sex-based risk is real. Women and girls have unique vulnerabilities to sexual violence, including in institutional settings such as hospitals, but also in prisons, toilets and changing rooms. Protections that are recognised in law should not be optional. The tribunal’s judgment in the case of the Darlington nurses was clear that failure to provide single-sex changing rooms violated their dignity— The Deputy Presiding Officer: A question, please. Ash Regan: That vulnerability also applies to female patients in mixed-sex hospitals— The Deputy Presiding Officer: Let us hear a question. Ash Regan: How many rapes of women and girls in Scottish hospitals are acceptable to the Government? Neil Gray: None is acceptable to the Government.”
“The latest Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service figures show a 43 per cent post-Covid rise in under-16s who are reported for rape and sexual assault. There is a crisis of violence against women and girls in Scotland. What we are currently doing is not working. Will the Government please do something different and start with what the Lord Advocate has described as root-cause offending: the violence against women of prostitution? Prostitution dehumanises women and girls, and that human rights abuse is currently state sanctioned. Will the Government take this opportunity to stand up for women and girls, protect them and support my unbuyable bill?”
“To ask the Scottish Government whether it will consider allocating ring-fenced funding to local authorities in the 2026-27 budget to ensure consistent provision of prostitution support and exit services across Scotland, in line with the joint Scottish Government and Convention of Scottish Local Authorities equally safe commitment to tackling commercial sexual exploitation. (S6O- 05365)”
“Holyrood was designed at the outset to be more transparent, more participatory and more accountable than Westminster, and every single member in here has a duty to protect those principles and not to undermine them.”
“The process has been on-going for more than seven months and concludes with a proposed sanction just as I prepare for a critical stage 1 debate and vote, which were supposed to take place next week. Advancing a bill of that nature against the roots of male violence against women has been extraordinarily challenging, despite the issue supposedly being a priority in this Parliament for women and girls across Scotland and those around the world who are trafficked here and groomed and coerced in our own towns and cities. Despite the barriers that I have faced, which have included having no non-Government bills unit resource such as other members have enjoyed for their members’ bills, I am working to make—I hope—meaningful legislative change that the Parliament and the country can be proud of.”
“The logic— which the convener has repeated here today— appears to be that publicising anything that is loosely interpreted as an intention to complain would impact a potential ESC investigation, despite such an investigation clearly never commencing because there was no ethical standards complaint in order to trigger one. After six sessions of this Parliament, there remains no convener code for committees that I or other members could have used, despite unanimous agreement on the critical importance of committees to an effective legislature. I also make Parliament aware that this is not the first complaint against me to the Ethical Standards Commissioner since I launched the consultation on my unbuyable bill.”
“Meanwhile, the Ethical Standards Commissioner pursued a complaint about me making a complaint that the commissioner never actually received, as I never made the complaint. Upholding our duty to defend the judiciary, however, is specified in section 1 of the Judiciary and Courts (Scotland) Act 2008, which obligates us, as members of the Parliament, to do so. Other members who similarly publicised their grave concerns have received no proposed sanctions. My legal advice, from Roddy Dunlop KC, highlights both the commissioner’s misrepresentation of human rights legislation and a confused interpretation of the code.”
“I sought and gratefully received advice from the Presiding Officer and the Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee in response to overwhelming concern from the public, the Law Society of Scotland and the Faculty of Advocates, where there was widespread condemnation of an attack on the judiciary from a member of this Parliament with a privileged position of deputy convener. That committee has human rights and civil justice responsibilities, which—I believe— compounded the gravity of the incendiary public comments accusing the Supreme Court of “bigotry, prejudice and hatred”. What followed was widely regarded as farcical, with the member allowed to dial in to vote to save herself from a motion to remove her that had been lodged by a committee member, Tess White.”
“Over these past decades, public trust in this Parliament has declined significantly, and that is every member’s joint responsibility. Confidence in this institution is now at its lowest point since devolution began, dropping 20 points in just 10 years. I think that Scots expect their Parliament to act to their values and in their interests. Today, many people are, unfortunately, questioning whether we still do that. Transparency is central to building and sustaining trust, and more than 90 per cent of Scots value openness in public decision making. Honesty, clarity and accountability are values that should guide how we all operate.”
“To ask the Scottish Government, regarding its equally safe delivery plan, what discussions the Minister for Equalities has had with ministerial colleagues regarding the provision of sustained social and economic investment in prevention, housing, safety and long-term recovery for women and children currently in, or who are survivors of, the commercial sexual exploitation of prostitution. (S6O-05321)”
“We are taking forward the detailed work that is necessary as a consequence. We have had sight of the Equality and Human Rights Commission’s updated code of practice, but it is for United Kingdom Government ministers to publish that, and we await that happening. On the outcome of the tribunal, there are still matters to run their course, including the remedy hearings, and it is open to individuals to appeal the decision. It is important at this stage to take calm reflection of the judgment, which is complex both legally and from a policy perspective, and to ensure that we are responding adequately across”
“The Sandie Peggie employment tribunal exposes not just one employer’s failings but a systemic collapse in how public bodies understand and uphold women’s sex-based rights. This judgment further exposed how whistleblowers are harassed merely for speaking up for themselves or for others. Women in Scotland should not have to become litigants simply to secure their lawful rights to dignity and safety at work and in public spaces and services. The Supreme Court settled the law. Will the Government now act with urgency to follow the law, as the Equality and Human Rights Commission advised months ago, and support its public bodies to follow the law and stop this ridiculous waste of taxpayers’ money? Neil Gray: We have been clear since the Supreme Court ruling that we accept its judgment.”
“We must use what we have and do what we can to combat that. The majority of those who are in prostitution are not there by choice. They are girls who have been in our care system; they have been sexually abused as children; they have been groomed; they have been coerced; or they have been trafficked into this country. Those girls deserve more, so I believe that this Parliament should act to protect them. As Madame Pelicot bravely said, the “shame must change sides”.”
“The choice is clear. We know the problem and we know the perpetrators, and now we must act to end male violence against women and girls anywhere that it takes place, whether it is online or offline. Our society cannot continue to tolerate the fact that vulnerable women’s and girls’ bodies are bought, sold or abused. This Parliament has the power and the responsibility to stop it, and my unbuyable bill is a critical first step in that. This Parliament cannot say that it is serious about combating violence against women and girls if it does not take this opportunity. I have been here for nearly 10 years and, like some of the other speakers, I have watched this debate take place year after year. The statistics show that, rather than things getting better for women and girls, they actually getting worse.”
“Rising sexual crimes, grooming, trafficking and prostitution are all interconnected and all are driven by male demand. We have the evidence, the data and the legal framework to compel us, united by the common purpose to act in devolved and reserved areas and across local authorities and international bodies. In this Parliament, I believe that we can take three immediate steps: first, fully implement the For Women Scotland Supreme Court judgment and ensure that all laws and policies recognise sex-based risk; secondly, through my unbuyable bill, criminalise the purchase of sex and provide robust support for those who are exploited; and thirdly, take domestic violence and trafficking laws seriously, backed by robust data capture and enforcement, in order to detect networked exploitation and protect potential victims and support survivors.”
“They see prostituted women not as people but as products for sale, purchase, review and to meet their wants, no matter how dehumanising, degrading or violent. They are more likely to commit other forms of sexual violence, and their actions directly drive the criminal marketplace for coercion, sex trafficking and other multilayered exploitation. The Supreme Court ruling delivered legal clarity on “woman”, “man” and “sex”, and now this Parliament must act on that clarity to tackle sex- based risk. Women and girls continue to be commercially sexually exploited; it is legally tolerated as long as it does not occur in public. A Scotland that tolerates commercial exploitation by where it happens—rather than that it happens—is a form of state-endorsed systemic violence, and that makes Scotland a pimp state.”