Move to let 16-year-olds buy porn is blocked

A call to allow 16-year-olds to buy hardcore pornography was narrowly blocked by Liberal Democrat activists yesterday, who decided to give the party more time to consider the controversial proposal.

The motion to make access to pornography and sex shops easier was delayed by only 31 votes after a heated debate. Delegates in Brighton referred the motion back to the party's executive for review after an impassioned plea from Simon Hughes, the home affairs spokesman. It will be debated at a future conference.

The policy proposal said that the "consensual" viewing of pornography "that portrays all forms of sexuality involving consenting adults is acceptable in today's society".

The motion was proposed by members of the Liberal Democrat Youth and Student (LDYS) group who argued that current laws on pornography were outdated and needed revising to keep up with the availability of sexual material on the internet and late-night television.

Chris Gee, of LDYS, who proposed the motion, argued that "pornography is not new. It has been around ever since men drew on the walls of caves." He cited evidence from Denmark showing that the liberalisation of porn laws led to a 66 per cent decrease in sex offences. "Regret and moral prurience will be a licence for abuse," he said. "What would you prefer: 16-year-olds watching porn or having sex?"

But Jason Moleman from Hendon said the motion condoned the exploitation not only of porn actors but of those who produced and watched the films. "It is generally the case that pornography is degrading to all involved," he said.

Lynne Ravenscroft, from Hampshire North East, made a heartfelt call to reject the motion and said she found porn movies "utterly degrading, utterly disgusting, utterly distressing. The women in these films are real women. They are not cardboard characters," she said. "How far should the camera be from the clitoris? Two centimetres? 20 centimetres? 200 centimetres? 2,000 centimetres? How many times does a woman have to be buggered on the screen? Once, five times, 10 times?"

Julia Gash, a sex shop owner who represents Shef-field Hallam Liberal Demo-crats, told the conference she was once a member of the women's movement and had campaigned against pornography. But she had changed her views and now opposed the "over 18 restrictions" that applied to her shop. She said girls of 16 should be able to buy sex toys and browse on her adult web site. At present only over-18s are allowed in sex shops. "I do not believe that porn in itself is inherently degrading or sexist, it is simply badly produced," she said.

However, Nasser Butt, a councillor from Sutton, vehemently argued against the moves to make porn easier to buy. He said the motion would send the wrong message to the country about Liberal Democrat priorities, particularly after a series of horrific child sex murders. "This subject is not for youth and students, it is for experienced people," he argued to boos from young people in the hall.

Mr Butt called for the motion to be referred back to the party's Federal Executive to review the policy and come back with proposals to the next conference on how to proceed.

Simon Hughes successfully backed his call for caution and said that the motion was "good" but incomplete. He said a review of the pornography laws was needed but it should be more wide ranging than the proposals being debated.

The decision to defer the motion will relieve the party leadership who were embarrassed by the debate and felt it compromised their efforts to promote the Liberal Democrats as a serious party capable of government.