Rocker123 (20-02-13), simon2280 (20-02-13), The Equalizer (20-02-13)
I'd guess that there will be no public records of this meeting bar maybe some minutes so as to keep the identity of the women private. I doubt it was done to shaft anyone, because Rachel and Stephanie probably would not of attended if their real names and ID's were to be made public.
Then again, "snakey" is a perfect term to describe the conduct of the JOC (as well as the conduct of Ruhama and TORL) to date.
To be honest, I find it a coincidence that for the one JOC Meeting where Independent Sex Workers were afforded the opportunity to put forth testimony which outlines the negative implications of Swedish-style Legislation (and the negative consequences it will impose upon those whom it supposedly "protects"), the JOC suddenly feels there is no need to document and archive the proceedings.
If the meeting was done in private was on our request. Respect our privacy and choice, stop moaning about it ... !
The Committee members took notes , also we have been told they will look at other models and ask how it works in different countries, different laws... such as New Zealand...
Was a great experince and we put very good points across. to the Committee..
Cable87 (20-02-13), Chutney (21-02-13), client030314 (20-02-13), client101 (20-02-13), Curvaceous Kate (20-02-13), dob (20-02-13), funlover12 (21-02-13), JAMESCORK (20-02-13), jizrag (20-02-13), justfrank44 (20-02-13), LaBelleThatcher (20-02-13), mellors (20-02-13), Nicole (21-02-13), RicFlair (20-02-13), richieboy (20-02-13), Rocker123 (20-02-13), samlad (21-02-13), SophieX (20-02-13), Stephanie (20-02-13), The D Man (21-02-13), The Equalizer (20-02-13), the traveller (20-02-13), thehighwayman (22-02-13)
funlover12 (21-02-13)
Curvaceous Kate (20-02-13)
Fair play to ye, it cant be easy speaking to a bunch of suits.
Stephanie (21-02-13)