That SUN article is of course, horrible.
The lazy writer Simon Kent said:
Until then prostitution will operate in a vague, ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ form in Ontario. It will be (mostly) unregulated until police have clear determination on the terms of so-called “bawdy house” trade.
There's little that is "vague" about prostitution in Toronto expect maybe the B&S vagueness of some of the Asian agencies.
The slippery slope type argument is probably what has kept it from being legalized up to this point.
There's also the NIMBY argument of the idiot Mamoliti, And the entire purpose of the SUN's article comes down to this bit of nonsense:
Puritanical Giorgio Mammoliti said:
“I’ve always suggested we bring them as far away from the city as possible,” he said. “Of course (the island) is an option, I don’t see why it shouldn’t be. Why is my neighbourhood an option and the island not?”
Which just about sums up the position of those in favour of legalized sex work.
Mammoliti 's ridiculous contention is NOT AT ALL the summation of the position of those in favour or legalized sex work. The SUN's *ahem*
journalist plagiarized or re-used this old quote from an earlier article and obviously could not be bothered to speak to anyone who is actually in favour of legalized sex work, and in accepting it as a legitimate business which would set up in an area, pay rent, taxes etc like other licensed businesses.
Put in on the Island?! That makes no sense and could only be uttered by someone who never goes to the Islands, only imagines that area to be dead, wasted space, and has no real interest in allowing brothels to operate in the city.
I hate to break it to you Giorgio but there's already prostitution quietly happening in your neighbourhood.