Women who work in Bristol’s two sexual entertainment venues have threatened a judicial review against the city council, if it goes ahead with a proposal to close the venues down.
The United Voices of the World trade union, which represents the dancers at Urban Tiger and Central Chambers, has warned Bristol City Council that it will take legal action against should the ‘nil cap’ policy banning all sexual entertainment venues in Bristol go ahead.
The union’s sex worker branch, the United Sex Workers, has written to the council and its licensing committee, to say introducing a policy would constitute indirect gender discrimination and effectively break the law.
READ MORE: Public asked whether strip clubs should be banned
“The introduction of a nil-cap policy would plainly disadvantage strippers and, in turn, women,” said the letter from the USW.
“The obvious disadvantage is preventing strippers from working in an occupation, city, and venue of their choice. This disadvantage poses a serious threat to their livelihoods, safety, and health of over 100 individuals, including strippers and other staff employed by SEVs,” the union added.
A local authority or government taking action - known as a ‘provision, commission or practice, or PCP - that ends up disproportionately affecting women is allowed by law, the union’s legal letter said, but only if they can demonstrate a ‘legitimate aim’.
Campaigners and the women working in Bristol’s sexual entertainment venues have previously pointed out that other venues that host male stripper nights do not need to have the same level of regulation and are not included in the fresh attempts to close down their venues.
The letter continues: “It is wholly unclear what the 'legitimate aim' of the PCP would be. Supporters of the policy sometimes claim that the aim is reducing VAWG [violence against women and girls]. However, there is absolutely no evidence that the existence of SEVs correlates with an increase in VAWG, either in a specific geographical area or in general.
“There is evidently also no evidence of causation. To the contrary, evidence regarding crime rates shows SEVs are amongst the safest venues for female workers within the night-time economy, partially due to CCTV, security, and regulation.
“Licences are renewed annually and impose strict CCTV and security requirements, alongside other stringent conditions such as non-contact rules between strippers and customers.
"CCTV is regularly reviewed by the police and the council to ensure compliance. There have been no licence breaches by the two existing SEVs. All strippers undergo identity checks and must demonstrate their right to work. Neither venue is recorded by the police as source of concern for sexual assault."
Both of Bristol’s strip club venues had their licences renewed in September last year by the council’s licensing committee, after councillors heard both clubs had met all the requirements of their licence conditions, and the police had not objected.
But that licensing committee then began a large consultation exercise, asking people in Bristol about a proposal to have a ‘nil-cap’ - a policy which reduces the number of sexual entertainment venues in the city to zero.
“The PCP would force most strippers into either unemployment and poverty, or more dangerous unregulated venues and/or private parties. This constitutes harm in itself, and would expose the workers to a greater risk of violence against women and girls,” the strippers’ union added.
The union’s legal warning added that they could take Bristol City Council to the Human Rights Commission or start a judicial review, if the ‘nil-cap’ policy is passed.
“If the council introduces the PCP, the union and our members reserve our rights to make a complaint to the Equality and Human Rights Commission and/or commence judicial review proceedings within three months of the PCP’s enactment,” it warned.
“Judicial review proceedings may be issued for breach of the Equalities Act.
“In addition, we reserve our rights to issue proceedings based on the Human Rights Act 1998, along with the common law grounds of illegality, unreasonableness, and procedural unfairness,” it added.
What do you think? Sign in and join the conversations in the comments below
And the strippers’ union also warned that the council could be liable to pay compensation to those workers left out of a job if the strip clubs are closed down. “Potential remedies may include an order quashing the PCP,” the union warned.
“In terms of individual compensation, this may be awarded for financial loss, injury to feelings, any personal injury caused, and aggravated damages, potentially for over 100 individuals,” it added.
A spokesperson for Bristol City Council said: “The responses to the recently closed Sex Establishments Policy consultation continue to be analysed.
"Cross-party councillors sitting on the Licensing Committee will consider these responses and other relevant information associated with the policy before deciding if any changes to the policy are required. No date has yet been set for when this committee will meet to decide on any amendments to the policy," he added.
When the consultation launched in September, the chair of its licensing committee stressed that "at this stage no decisions have been made".
In December, a member of the Bristol Women's Commission claimed that closing the clubs would help to tackle 'the epidemic of sexual and gender-based violence'.
Want our best stories with fewer ads and alerts when the biggest news stories drop? Download our app on iPhone or Android
