Exclusive:Prostitution Scotland: Campaign group submits formal complaint questioning Holyrood's 'neutrality'

Nordic Model Now! has demanded an apology and a full investigation, saying vital evidence from prostitution survivors was not included in the criminal justice committee’s stage one report on the Prostitution (Offences and Support) (Scotland) Bill.

This bill had aimed to introduce what is known as the Nordic model to Scotland. This would have decriminalised the selling of sex while criminalising the buying of sex.

However, the bill fell at stage one by 64 votes to 54 last month.

This comes after Ash Regan, the MSP behind the bill, wrote to the criminal justice committee calling into question its neutrality and accusing members of “mischaracterising” her bill.

In the complaint, Nordic Model Now! claims that follow-up evidence provided by Amanda Quick, a prostitution survivor, was not included in the committee’s report.

The group said it was “dismayed” at the oversight as it meant the committee’s findings were based on “incomplete” evidence where “one side of the debate was unfairly over-represented”.

Get our revamped Steamie newsletter

In January the committee clerks said they were “very sorry for any confusion or upset caused” and later added this evidence, however Nordic Model Now! argues the timing was “inappropriate” and meant MSPs on the committee were “unlikely to have considered it when they were working on their report”.

In their official complaint, the group said: “The upset to individuals concerned was absolutely not the point and apologising for that trivialises the very serious issue that the committee members were not given all the information, so that they could make an informed decision.

“This was a serious dereliction of duty and it is possible that this affected the outcome.”

It added this was “misleading” and “undermined Amanda’s credibility because she said a number of times during her oral evidence that she would send further evidence”. It went on: “If the committee did not receive that follow-up evidence, it would have called her honesty and reliability into question.”

The complaint added it shows the process was “biased in favour of those who opposed the bill" and “it does not give confidence in the Scottish Parliament’s procedures”.

Nordic Model Now! said: “At the very least there should be a full and independent investigation and a public report to the parliament including the results and recommendations in order to ensure such a thing can never happen again, with a copy to us.

“An apology that recognises the seriousness of the issue and a commitment to ensure such a thing can never happen again, would also be appreciated.”

This comes after Ms Regan criticised the committee and said the way the committee approached its evidence sessions was “not even-handed”.

She said those who were against her bill were “afforded a qualitatively different form of access to committee members” which “undermines confidence in the neutrality” of the committee.

In an email to the committee, Ms Regan said: “Scrutiny failures have real-world consequences.

“Survivors in Scotland, whose evidence has been ignored or discounted during scrutiny of the Unbuyable bill, have reported consideration of a human rights-based judicial review and potential class action, if legislative inaction continues in Scotland.”

A spokesperson for the committee said its members carried out “very detailed and balanced scrutiny” of the “contentious” bill, including 540 written submissions.

They said the “conflicting evidence” the committee received meant the evidence was “not definitive and is highly contested”.

The spokesperson said: “In the end, at stage one, the whole parliament voted not to support the bill.

“Due to an administrative oversight, the supplementary submission was not circulated before the committee’s report was published.

“However, it was circulated to committee members and published online ahead of the stage one debate on the bill.

“The committee did have the benefit of hearing from the representative of Nordic Model Now! at the time.”