The next item of business is a member's business debate on motion 2911, in the name of Ruth Maguire, on online pimping. This debate will be concluded without any questions being put, and I would ask those members who wish to speak in the debate to please press the request to speak buttons now. I call on Ruth Maguire to open the debate, seven minutes please, Ms Maguire. Thank you, Presiding Officer. Today I am calling for three things, that the Scottish Government urgently outlaw online pimping, that traffickers and exploiters are held to account with the full force of our criminal justice system, and that comprehensive support and exiting services for women advertised and exploited via pimping websites is provided. I would like to begin by thanking colleagues from Labour, the Conservatives and the SNP for supporting my motion and enabling this debate to go ahead and thank everyone who is contributing today. I am grateful to UK Feminista, who supported and facilitated the inquiry and to all those who took part. I also wish to thank those who have provided briefing materials and feedback for today, but particularly a model for Scotland. I will declare an interest as a member of the searing group, however it is the members of the group, the women who generously and openly share their lived experience and expertise, those who have exited prostitution, the front-line organisations who work with women and the grass-roots campaigners who do the real work. I am grateful to know them and feel very privileged to work with them. Their courage and tenacity is awe-inspiring. In 2021, the Scottish Parliament's cross-party group on commercial sexual exploitation, which I co-convened with Rhoda Grant, conducted an inquiry into pimping websites. I think that most people in Scotland would be surprised that our country at the moment is a place where our current laws mean that criminal gangs profiting from the sexual exploitation of women can hide in plain sight using so-called adult services websites. A quick glance at one of those sites today would show you that in this city right now there are women who have been trafficked here both from outwith and within our borders who are being subjected to abuse, violence and humiliation to satisfy the demand of a minority of men. That is not just happening in Edinburgh but right across the country. Scotland's laws on prostitution have not kept pace with technological change. As a result, commercial pimping websites, which advertise individuals for prostitution across Scotland, currently operate openly and freely. The problem that we face online pimping is legal and fuels sex trafficking in Scotland. Detective Superintendent Filippo Capaldi, head of police Scotland's national human trafficking unit, told our inquiry. Adult services websites are one of the main facilitators of trafficking for the purposes of sexual exploitation in Scotland and the rest of the UK. We come across them quite commonly when we are dealing with trafficking inquiries, particularly involving foreign nationals.  Those websites, which host adverts for prostitution, expand the scale of sexual exploitation, enabling anyone on the internet to anonymously access women being advertised for prostitution. Websites are routinely used by sex traffickers and there is no realistic way that the website operators can prevent that. Most prostitution advertising now takes place online rather than on the street or in local newspapers. A small number of websites dominate this online advertising marketplace.  By placing an advert on one of those sites, trafficking gangs can quickly and easily advertise their victims to sex buyers across the country, as well as move their victims between different locations by simply altering the location information on their advert. Frankly put, those websites make the brutal business of sex trafficking easier and quicker for criminals. They do not deliver protection or security to the women being advertised on them. On the contrary, they typically openly display the phone numbers of the women being advertised, allowing anyone with access to the internet to immediately and anonymously access those women. There is also no way that website operators can identify if a woman is being advertised on their site, if she is being exploited by a third party such as a trafficker or pimp. As Megan King, a survivor of prostitution, told our inquiry, when I was handed over to my first client, at which point I had no idea I was being sold into the sex trade, that client took intimate photos of me, some in my underwear and others more intimate and degrading. The underwear shots were then used as a profile picture on my adult work profile that my pimp created without my knowledge or consent. There is no real way that the website can verify that that woman is the same woman that is then sold to a punter. In my situation, I believe that the pimp's wife took passport photographs under which all of the girls were then advertised. An inquiry by the UK Parliament's all-parliamentary group on prostitution and the global sex trade concluded that pimping websites are now core to the typical business model of sex trafficking. Those websites have turbocharged sex trafficking trade. The websites incentivise sexual exploitation by making it quick and easy for pimps and traffickers to advertise their victims to men who pay for sex. This online pimping is taking place on an industrial scale in Scotland yet their operations fall through the cracks of our outdated prostitution laws and website owners profit from this exploitation with impunity. The Scottish Government must, with urgency, get on with adopting laws against sexual exploitation that are fit for the 21st century. That requires making it a criminal offence to enable or profit from the prostitution of another person.  It's time to get serious about men's violence against women and girls in all its forms. It's time to put pimps and traffickers out of business. I now call on Eleanor Woodham to be followed by Russell Finlay up to four minutes. First, let me express my gratitude to my colleague Ruth Maguire for securing this important debate and to my colleagues in the cross-party group on ending commercial sex exploitation for their determined and focused work to highlight the brutal business that is the world of online pimping. In Scotland, we have a Government that rightly recognises prostitution as a form of violence against women and our equally safe strategy underlines that. We need to implement a challenge and demand approach, whereby it is the sex buyer who is recognised as the driver for this violence and in turn the pimps, whether on the streets, in brothels or operating online, are understood to be the traffickers and suppliers of prostituted women. It beggars belief that men in Scotland are able to simply turn on their smartphones and open up the likes of Viva Street platform and order themselves access to a women's body as easily as they may order a pizza. What does that say about the position of women in our society? Commodities to be bought and sold, trafficked and abused from coast to coast. There is very little empowerment for women in a system that allows online platform companies and pimps to get rich at the bodily expense of women. I recently watched the panorama documentary online pimps exposed, which saw investigative journalist Bronam Monroe take a forensic look at the Viva Street platform, where you can buy a second hand car as easily as you can find a woman in your own vicinity to exploit. Now, whilst the company maintained that they do all they can to prevent pimps from operating on the site, that is not believable when the programme uncovered evidence that hundreds of ads included the same mobile phone number and the same language, including all of the same grammatical errors, but advertised multiple women. Clear warning signs at Viva Street should have picked up on its indicators of sexual exploitation. No Northern Irish trafficker was followed as he picked up women at airports who were then quickly added to the platform and access to their bodies for sale within hours. That clearly indicates sexual exploitation for financial gain. The news documentary also featured interviews with Detective Sergeant Stuart Pell, who runs the exploitation team at Lancashire Police. He told panorama, and I quote, "...every single job is Viva Street. They advertise over Viva Street. It is very common knowledge that if you need sexual services, Viva Street is the place that you'll find it. You can arrange what you want the girl to look like. It's like a takeaway menu. There isn't one single job I have done that's not Viva Street." That is echoed by Detective Superintendent Filippo Capaldi, head of Scotland's Police and National Human Trafficking Unit, who said that adult services websites are one of the main facilitators of trafficking for the purposes of sexual exploitation in Scotland and the rest of the UK, and we come across them quite commonly when we're dealing with trafficking inquiries, particularly involving foreign nationals. There have been numerous prosecutions of pimping and sex trafficking involving people who have used Viva Street to advertise the women they are exploiting. In one case in the north-west of England, a man spent £25,000 on adverts in Viva Street in 2017. He actually gave them his own personal account manager. What does that say? A model for Scotland's briefing for today's debate further outlines that a small number of highly lucrative pimping websites continue to dominate the online marketing place for the advertising of prostitution.  Finally, women are being murdered and assaulted in appalling numbers. We cannot disengage this reality from the exploitation of women involved in prostitution and pornography. Violence against women must be seen in all of its forms and in all of the places that exist. Reducing women to commodities harms all of us and our laws must reflect that. I congratulate Ruth Maguire on bringing forward this important debate. I am very glad for the opportunity to speak in it. As MSPs, we get bombarded with a vast amount of information from political parties, public and professional bodies, members of the public, pressure groups, charities and many others. I do not think that anyone can really say that we claim to read it all. However, I urge all members to take the time to read the report on online pimping, which has been produced by the cross-party group on commercial sexual exploitation. This is a thorough and well-researched piece of work that lays bare the extent of the online sex industry and the hugely complex issues around how best to deal with it. The report identifies four main websites operating in the UK. Today, one of those websites contains 905 adverts for prostitution, often euphemistically misnamed as escorting. Of those adverts, 358 are in Glasgow with 176 in Edinburgh. However, it is not just our big cities, with women for sale today in all but two of our 32 local authority areas. Some of the content is deeply disturbing.  There are women from many countries, including those such as Romania, which have associations with the trafficking of people. Those series of websites are a window into a deeply disturbing and dangerous world. Services and prices are displayed alongside photos of those women, who we are expected to believe have made the choice to do what they are doing. The report makes clear that many of those women are treated as no more than commodities, enslaved by cross-border criminal gangs. One of the most shocking findings of the CPG report is that the median time a sex trafficking victim is held captive is 274 days or approximately nine months. In that time, they will be raped 795 times. I note with interest the competing views about how law enforcement deals with those websites and the sex trade more generally. It seems that police have sought to engage with those sites in order to try to identify and catch criminal gangs and offer some form of protection to the victims. The police approach seems to be based on pragmatism and an acceptance that the trade and sex will always be with us. However, the CPG report suggests that a much more robust approach is necessary, citing France as an example. One concern is that this may drive the trade further underground, potentially making it even harder for the police and increasing the danger to women. While I can appreciate both perspectives, I am sure that this will be the subject of continued debate. I have only got four minutes, so I would like to conclude by categorically agreeing with others that men are the catalyst for this online trade in women. Just as men have controlled sex for sale throughout the ages long before the internet, it is men who use violence and threats to control their female victims and it is men who maintain the trade by paying for sex, with absolutely no regard for the subjugation and misery that they are fuelling. This trade is part of a broader societal issues affecting women and girls from the sexualisation of children, the abundance of pornography, female exploitation, everyday sexism and discrimination right through to a criminal justice system in which women continue to be failed, as was acknowledged in here this week by the cabinet secretary for justice. Last year, it was reported that an English university was offering sessions to support students involved in sex work. I agree with the UK higher education minister, Michelle Donilon, who said that this was legitimising a dangerous industry. Finally, I would like to conclude by stating that it is incumbent on all men to stand up and be counted to be part of the solution and not part of the problem. I thank Ruth Maguire for bringing forward this debate and also for her work on the cross-party group on commercial sexual exploitation. The group's report on online pimping was a detailed but harrowing piece of work that covers so many bases. In many cases, girls and women are trafficked and then bought, sold or hired by men for the purpose of sexual violence and exploitation. Unfortunately, that is not new, but the rise of the internet has changed the landscape and, as the CPG reports notes, fuelled a demand and grew the market in recent years. In the past, men who paid for sex were at risk of being caught by frequenting red light districts. Nowadays, men can access websites to buy women by the hour just as easily as they can do online grocery shopping. Rightly, the Scottish Government recognises prostitution as an example of gender-based violence. Equally safe, as we have heard, is the national strategy to prevent and eradicate all forms of violence against women and girls. It has also been adapted for schools to embed gender equality into our education system and prevent gender-based violence. That is important for so many reasons, including in relation to men's demand for prostitution. Research from the Sandiford Clinic in Glasgow found that men who had not purchased sex by the age of 25 are less likely to ever do so. By educating boys and young men and highlighting that prostitution is sexual exploitation, we can hopefully curb some of that demand. We also need reforms to the law in terms of those who pay for sex and the need to end commercial sexual exploitation is clear. I know that the Scottish Government has been considering international best practice in tackling the harms associated with prostitution, and I welcome the commitment to develop a model that will reduce the harms of prostitution and challenge men's demands but will also support women to exit prostitution. Right now, as Ruth Maguire points out, online pimping is legal, but those women who may well have been trafficked are criminally liable. Equally safe emphasises the importance of excess services to support women to leave prostitution and move on with their lives. Importantly, those women deserve to be treated without fear of judgment and discrimination. Women who have been involved in prostitution experience huge stigma, but the outrage should be directed towards those men who buy sex. It is crucial that the model for Scotland tackles the stigma experienced by women, encourages them to come forward and get the help and support they are entitled to, and not make the victims of sexual exploitation the people who face criminalisation. Presiding Officer, I commend the cross-party group on its inquiry. I want to thank everyone involved for their work and especially to those women, those survivors of sexual exploitation who are trying to affect change. The Scottish Government's approach to date has been good, but we need legislative changes. It is time to outlaw online pimping, and I look forward to hearing an update from the minister on the planned reforms. I now call Rhoda Grant to be followed by Mikey Chapman up to four minutes. I too would like to congratulate Ruth Maguire on securing this debate and also say that it is really good to see her back in the chamber. We all know and recognise that prostitution is violence against women. In a country that values equality, men should not be able to buy access to other people's bodies. That is male violence, and it is the abuse of power, and it has no place in Scotland. Yet today there are 1,595 women in sale in Scotland on Viva Street and Adult Works. That is because there is a sizeable minority of men in Scotland who are abusive and they lead to the creation of a lucrative industry. The pimps, traffickers and brothelkeepers exploit that market, but to do so they need to be able to advertise their victims to sex buyers. Those pimps are the same whether they advertise on the street, own a brothel or operate a website. They facilitate and profit from the prostitution of others. Viva Street, Adult Works and the rest of them are simply that. They are pimps. Making money through promoting violence against women and exploiting people to feed this appalling trade. The truth is that prostitution is very lucrative to those who manage it. Those websites say that they have measures in place to stop victims of trafficking being advertised on their sites. However, as we heard from Ruth Maguire, our witnesses in the report tell us very different and Megan King's evidence was alarming. Elaine Witham cited last year's BBC panorama broadcast, an investigation into Viva Street, that exposed how pimps and their traffickers used the site to advertise their victims. The journalist who led the investigation Ronan Monroe said, "...I was able to identify a pattern surrounding phone numbers, surrounding the names of the women that were being advertised, the names of women that were passing through multiple post codes. There were hundreds of numbers connected to multiple ads. Of the 12,000 ads that I looked at, they were littered with adverts that I would say were concerning. Surely if she can see that, surely then so should the police." Elaine also quoted the case that shows how seriously Viva Street takes the issue of sex trafficking, the single trafficker who spent £25,000. Prior to their arrest, Viva Street did not respond to the man's high rate of spending on prostitution adverts by calling the police, but they allocated him an account manager. Pimping websites have a major vested interest in prostitution and will oppose any attempts to combat that exploitation. National Ugly Mugs, a charity that is launching Numbrella Lane, a service in Scotland for people involved in the sex trade. They have the Viva Street logo on their homepage of their website, listed as one of their funders. Their website states, "...we have a long standing relationship with Viva Street that began in 2015. Last year, National Ugly Mugs lobbied the Scottish Government through the Equally Safe Consultation to fully decriminalise the sex trade, including third parties. The relationship between exploiters and organisations promoting decriminalisations of pimps is close, making money out of misery and using it to further the cause of misery. They must be stopped." I now call on Maggie Chapman to be followed by Bill Kidd up to four minutes. I thank Ruth Maguire for bringing this debate to the chamber today, because it allows me to give voice to those not represented by the sexual exploitation inquiry report, Sex Workers. As we seek to tackle violence against women and girls, including sex trafficking, we should follow the evidence to ensure that we support sex workers, keep them safe and tackle the causes and structures that enable both sex trafficking and violence against women and girls. Ruth Maguire. Shea Maggie Chapman, given way. I wonder if she would acknowledge that we may call them different names, but people who had been involved in prostitution were very much represented in our inquiry. We spoke with those who were involved in what might be deemed high-class prostitution and people who had been victimised in the street. The current sex workers were also invited to take part. They declined. As I will come to, I will talk about the responses that Scott Pepp, who represents sex workers, how their evidence was not included in that report. I do not agree that outlawing adult services websites will stop sex trafficking and deliver the kinds of changes that the motion outlines. Sex workers and groups that support and represent them do not want our online platforms to be banned, and they highlight three key reasons for that. First, sex workers use online platforms to screen clients to improve safety. They also use them to connect with each other, reducing isolation and keeping each other up-to-date with risk alerts. I will make some progress, if I may. Second, if online platforms were banned, it would force sex workers into on-street and other informal ways of working. That could disrupt their income streams, causing economic hardship. I will make progress, if I may. That would lead to survival sex work, which is more unsafe. There is clear evidence from the US that, following the Allow States and Victims to Fight Online Sex Trafficking Act and Stop Enabling Sex Traffickers Act 2018, violence experienced by sex workers increased, as did their vulnerability to pimps. It also, perhaps unexpectedly, negatively affected their ability to find other forms of work. They were less able to deal with mental and physical health issues and therefore less able to secure alternative employment. Third, banning online platforms risks displacing activities to the dark web and other unregulatable spaces, where there is far more risk of harm and less scope for outreach, safety and support services. The dark web is already used by traffickers. Banning online sites now will not stop that. Beyond the Gays, a research project funded by the Economic and Social Research Council found that sex workers overwhelmingly agreed that the internet had enabled them to work independently of pimps and managers. Screen clients effectively find out about their rights as workers and people, access networks and support and improve the quality of their working lives. Rather than criminalising and endangering sex workers, I urge the Scottish Government and those speaking in this debate today to engage with sex workers themselves, speak to them to explore how we can regulate adult services sites, improve safety, secure rights and options for earning the money needed to live, whilst also addressing poverty, economic insecurity and structural inequality. I would also encourage you all to read Scott Pepp's response to the CPG sexual exploitation inquiry. Their evidence was not included in that report. I will close with the words of a young sex worker in Edinburgh. Jay says, I know first hand the impact removing online advertising spaces causes as my colleagues in the United States were being contacted by pimps being told that it is different now and claiming that we need them. I don't want to see sex workers in Scotland pushed back into the hands of managers. When I started sex working at 21, I worked in a brothel where a manager took 60 per cent of my earnings and I kept 40 per cent. Being able to work alone has helped me, keep my earnings, helped me to achieve stable housing and allowed me to claw my way out of poverty. We must abolish poverty, not force women working in sex work into worse and more dangerous conditions in the name of saving them. I now call on Bill Kidd to be followed by Mercedes Villalba up to the four minutes please, Mr Kidd. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer, and thank you also to our colleague Ruth Maguire for lodging this motion for debate. I want to begin by stating my support for the model for Scotland campaign and to urge my fellow MSPs to public support the campaign as well. I agree that legislation is required to account for technological change, which has significantly increased the levels of sex trafficking and exploitation taking place in Scotland. As members will be aware, Rhoda Grant MSP was kind enough to arrange a briefing on the model for Scotland campaign last December, and this is still available online. During this, Valiant Richie, the co-ordinator for tackling human trafficking in Europe for the OSCE, that's the organisation for security and co-operation in Europe, spoke about the scale of the issue at hand. He highlighted that, 10 years ago, a study concluded that technology is the single greatest facilitator of the commercial sex industry, and he would want to say that, over the course of the past decade, the only thing that has changed that conclusion is that the situation has grown much worse. This is confirmed by police leading convictions against traffickers in the UK, noticeably from Sergeant Peele, that the scale of sex trafficking cannot be met by current police resources and these websites incentivise trafficking by increasing profitability. That brings us to our debate today, where we as legislators have the power and ability to begin the process of closing the legislative gap and look to stop online pimping websites from facilitating mass exploitation in Scotland whilst evading the law. Detective Chief Superintendent McCluskey, head of police protection for Scotland, recently awarded the Queen's police medal, described online pimping websites as the most significant enablers of sexual exploitation in Scotland. Should this Parliament move forward and legislate on this matter, I would urge fellow parliamentarians to remain informed and grounded about the horrific reality of the abuse and misery of sexual exploitation and trafficking, and that includes against children. I would underline that there is no such thing as a good or safe buyer of prostitution. I think that that is farcical. Our laws already recognise the important nature of sex trafficking and prostitution. I urge MSPs to anticipate that there will be false dichotomies and false narratives put forward by lobby groups that are paid for by those profiting from the illegal industry, including by people convicted of human trafficking offences. That can also come from people who have heard these narratives and whose information on the issue may vary. Going back to the OSCE co-ordinator for tackling trafficking in 57 countries from Europe, Central Asia and North America, Mr Ritchie explained that the advertising of women for sale on those websites opens a gateway to harm. Those websites allow on a great scale the intersection of somebody paying for sex with someone who did not come to that transaction willingly. Rather, whether a woman or a child, that person finds themselves trapped as a result of coercion, abuse or preying on vulnerability. The whole transaction is rendered as non-sexual sex. Those websites facilitate mass rape and, in the UK, have been linked to many cases of further violence and, indeed, homicides. They should not be legal under any circumstances. Those websites are against human rights.  Examples from the US and Israel show how successful legislation can be in shutting down the operation of those websites. For example, after Fosta Sesta was passed the online marketplace of those websites in the US dropped 80 per cent in 72 hours. It is our responsibility as MSPs to act to the limits of our abilities and to take this issue and the protection of the victims of exploitation and trafficking seriously. I now call on Mercedes Villalba to be followed by Paul McClennan, who will be the last speaker in the open debate up to four minutes. I won't be taking interventions as the dominant view has already been very well represented in today's debate. I would like to thank Ruth Maguire for bringing forward this motion for debate today. I believe that her concerns are genuine, but I am concerned that moves to criminalise online platforms used by sex workers will actually increase the risk to their safety. Sex workers themselves have said that they use online platforms to screen clients, to improve safety and to connect with each other for support. Those platforms are also providing greater opportunities for sex workers to access outreach. Safety and support services, and this is more likely than would be the case in unregulated online spaces like the dark web. That is why I believe that it is important that any decisions that could affect the safety and livelihoods of sex workers be taken after meaningful consultation with those in work and be based on evidence. The evidence from studies so far shows that the vast majority of sex workers believe that there are benefits to their use of online platforms. The Beyond the Gaze project surveyed sex workers who agreed that online platforms had improved their safety and their ability to access support. Those workers also noted that online platforms enabled them to screen clients, engage with sex worker networks and access support services. Crucially, the vast majority of them believe that both advertising sexual services online and purchasing these services should be legal. What happens when a criminalisation approach is pursued? In the USA, they have opted for criminalisation of online platforms through the Foster Sesta Law and the End Banking for Human Traffickers Act. Research published in the anti-trafficking review found that these laws had increased the financial insecurity of sex workers with some force to move offline to work on the streets or through an exploitative third party. The laws have also undermined sex workers' safety with the loss of web-based harm reduction tools, which helped to identify clients with the history of violence. The result of those laws has been to push those workers into more dangerous ways of working, into greater financial insecurity and away from support networks. They were passed in the face of opposition from workers, from anti-trafficking organisations, from criminal defence lawyers and from LGBT health and social justice organisations. The approach taken by the US is the clearest example of policy being made in spite of evidence and without meaningful consultation with those affected. As I have said before, if we are serious about supporting people to exit sex work, we have to tackle the underlying material issues that often drive people into sex work in the first place. Some of those issues are long-standing, such as a lack of employment or education opportunities and inadequate social security provision. Others are being worsened by the current cost of living crisis, such as rent, food prices and heating. Given the underlying material issues, the criminalisation of online platforms will not help individuals to leave sex work. Instead, it will leave sex workers facing greater risks to their safety, drive them into financial insecurity and deny them access to support networks and services. The proposal to criminalise online platforms is neither based on the evidence nor the views of sex workers. We need a new approach. That is why I continue to believe that we should pursue decriminalisation of sex work offline and online. I would like to conclude with a comment from a sex worker reflecting on the foster sester law. It was written to remind us that our lives are dispensable. We are not protected. Our work is unseen and irrelevant. It was written to destabilise our ability to live with any degree of agency. Prostitution remains aninherently exploitative of form. It is gender-based violence, no more, no less. The law as it stands presently means that this form of violence against women is wholly within the law, which is unthinkable in any other context. We have heard about the Government who deserves credit for its equally safe strategy, and I agree with that. Its recognition as prostitution as a form of violence against women and its stated commitment to develop a tailored Scottish model to tackle prostitution. In a brief in a model for Scotland stated, online pimping is currently legal in Scotland, as a result of highly lucrative pimping websites operate without impunity. Many people in Scotland do not see this, and they are unaware of the issues that are causing Scotland every day. We heard about the grants and there are about 1,500 to 2,000 women for sale now, which is incredible. Pimping websites play a key role in enabling and incentivising sex trafficking and sexual exploitation in Scotland. As a result, the websites make it quick and easy for traffickers and pimps to advertise their victims to sex buyers across the country. We heard Elena Whitham talk about how it is as easy as going shopping.  The Scottish Government is committed to challenging men's demand for prostitution and support women to exit sexual exploitation. To achieve that goal, model for Scotland asked the Scottish Government to outlaw online pimping, hold exploiters to account and deliver comprehensive support on existing services for individuals, advertised and exploited through the pimping websites. We heard about the cross-party group and what they found. In the three main issues, one was the pimping websites not only facilitating profit from the prostitution of others, the commercial pimping websites are designed to facilitate and profit from this form of violence against women. They also incentivise and enable sex trafficking by centralising and concentrating demand online. We've heard already before that a small number of high locative websites dominate the marketplace in Scotland. One of the other key things is that they are a market expanding force. Those sites can be set up pretty quickly. It is no legal expertise and they can open up pretty quickly. It is an industrial scale in which exploitation already takes place. The size and the scale of prostitution trade is not constant. It is a context dependent. I want to touch on this important part about the evidence-based to support the recommendations that we've heard of using in a couple of ways in online pimping. In the States, we've heard about the Stop Enabling Sex Fifers Act 2017. There was a website called Backpage, which was previously a major pimping website at that time, which has seen its demand significantly disrupted and has seen a real reduction in demand in websites in that regard. Online pimping is illegal. Legislation makes the legal assisting or profiting from another person's prostitution. It is punishable by seven years imprisonment and a fine of £150,000. The sentence can also enthase the 20 years imprisonment and a £3 million fine of the offences committed by an organised group. In conclusion, and this is a key part of evidence for myself, Valiant Ruchier from the OSCE and who is a co-ordinated for combating trafficking in human beings said that Governments should really be considering policy options to shut down those sites as quickly as possible. It's made much easier for traffickers to advertise people and much easier for buyers to find them. Anytime you can reduce that threshold, these barriers to access in the market, you're going to see more engagement, and that's been the major problem. It also reduces the risk for traffickers, so it makes it much more attractive. Online pimping is wrong. It's symptomatic of gender-based violence against women and has no place in Scotland in 2022. I think that Maggie Chapman might have inadvertently misled the chamber. On 12 October 2020, Ruth Maguire contacted Scott Pepp inviting them to give oral evidence to the cross-party group inquiry. On 10 November that year, I wrote to them again, again extending the invitation to give oral evidence but also suggesting that they might wish to give written evidence again if that wasn't possible. On 12 November, again I wrote to Scott Pepp asking them to give evidence to the inquiry, either oral or written. We had no response to that. I thank the member for her contribution. I would suggest that that's not a point of order on the basis that it is not a matter for the chair as to the content of statements and contributions from members. However, the member has made her point, which will be in the official report. I call on the minister, Ash Regan, to respond to the debate around seven minutes. I thank Ruth Maguire for raising that motion and commend the cross-party group on commercial sexual exploitation for their report. It highlights the cross-cutting issues related to online pimping, such as its role in facilitating human trafficking and the underlying issues of how women are viewed in society, which is timely to mention with the independent working group on misogyny, which is due to publish its report later this month. I thought that Ms Maguire's speech today was an unflinching portrait of this grim issue. There were many excellent speeches across the chamber today and I never thought that I would get to this point, but I am quite in agreement with Russell Finlay on many of the points that he raised in his speech. However, I cannot agree with either Maggie Chapman or Mercedes Villalba on the assessment of the issue or the approach that we should take to it. One of the things that was mentioned was, of course, listening to prostituted women. I agree that that is very important. Rhoda Grant's point of order that she just made did show that, of course, that is an important part of it. We want to listen. For the member's information, Scott Pepper is also on the Government's reference group, so we are, of course, listening very carefully to what they have to say. I agree that it is really important, and I think that I have spoken to a number of women who have been involved in prostitution, so I just wanted to assure members that that is something that I take very seriously. However, I urge the members to really look at the reality of prostitution in countries that have pursued a decriminalisation model, and the high level of trafficking that is involved and the conditions that are involved, and ones that, I am sorry to say, are very far from safe for the women that are involved there. The levels of commoditisation, which was a theme that came up quite a lot during the debate this afternoon, and I would reflect that this type of inhumane commoditisation harms the women that are involved in this, but it also harms, I think, an impact on society's view of all women. My question to both would be, is this appropriate and is this desirable? Is this what we want to see in Scotland? I would say that it is not. The Scottish Government is very clear that misogyny fuels violence against women and girls. It erodes our efforts to make progress and to address gender equality, and women's bodies being commodified in this way and purchased by men is, of course, a deeply misogynistic behaviour. Let me be clear that an exchange for sex or sexual services is not about sex, it is about power, it is about control, and the persistence of structures that normalise these harmful behaviours within our society. An equally safe definition includes the full spectrum of violence against women, and it doesn't prioritise tackling one behaviour over another. I think that that was something that was mentioned by Elena Wittemann-Herr's contribution in order to achieve equality and recognise that forms of gender violence frequently overlap. A recent Encompass snapshot survey demonstrated this, so the survey showed that 36 per cent of the women disclosed experiences of childhood sexual abuse, 83 per cent of the women disclosed experiences of domestic abuse and 20 per cent of women disclosed that they were under 18 when they were first involved in selling sex or sexual images. Our commitment to tackling prostitution is in line with our intention to incorporate the UN convention on the elimination of all forms of discrimination against women into law, and article 6 in particular compels Scotland to take all appropriate measures, including legislation, to suppress all forms of trafficking and exploitation of women through prostitution. That is a global call to action and one that we must respond to, and this year's programme for government commits to that. It commits the Government to develop a model for Scotland to challenge men's demand for prostitution, and in doing so it adds to a series of policy actions being taken forward to root out misogynistic behaviours in society. The cross-party working group report has called for a number of legislative solutions to address certain activities associated with prostitution and to restrict pimps and traffickers' room to operate and exploit. There are a number of laws in Scotland that make certain activities associated with prostitution illegal, so those are running a brothel, public solicitation to sell or purchase sex, loitering to sell or purchase, or procuring someone into becoming a prostitute and trafficking for the purposes of sexual exploitation. I fully recognise that those laws are piecemeal, and they were not consistently developed against a wider understanding of socio-economic deprivation or, in some cases, even when the internet was available. However, we are clear that the development of a new model to challenge men's demand must be informed by such factors that make things better and not worse for women, and we must shift the burden and focus on to the men who buy sex and have been able to do so for generations without being held to account for their actions. To support the design, we have tasked a short-life working group of experts to consider what the fundamental principles to underpin the model could be, and the group has met on two occasions and is making excellent progress. Its membership includes justice and health representatives, COSLA, Scottish Women's Aid, Violence Against Women, Partnership, Representation and Public Health Scotland. The development of principles will create a solid foundation that will uphold the values that we want to see reflected in the model, ensuring that women's safety is at its heart. Our ambition is to make very clear what the model stands for and draw on possible areas of consensus, such as the need to further recognise and address the structural and systemic disadvantages experienced by women. The draft principles are expected by the early part of this year, and we will further consult to feed further voices into this process. A national contract has been awarded to an independent research team to undertake lived experience research to better understand current support service provision and the needs of service users, and that will help to inform the support aspects of the model. Independent Scottish Government analysis is under way looking at international lessons learned to implementing laws that challenge men's demand. That will be vital in learning from the global stage on how best to approach this issue. It is perhaps helpful if I set out that regulation of internet and online service providers is a reserved matter. We are continuing to liaise closely with the UK Government on its forthcoming online safety bill. On 1 February, this year, the UK Government announced extra priority offences to be written on the face of the bill, which we understand will include offences involving sexual exploitation. In principle, that is a welcome move, as it aims to make the internet hostile to pimps and to human traffickers. Once we have more detail on that bill, we will consider that very carefully, especially in terms of the scope of the domestic model that we are developing. Now is the time for progressive and ambitious policies that support women to address the underlying causes of misogyny and drive forward gender equality. I am heartened by today's debate, and I am fully committed to continuing to work across the chamber and with stakeholders as we further progress with the model's development. Thank you minister. That concludes the debate, and I suspend this meeting until 2 pm.


Hi, I'm Zor. Welcome to a new Zor education. We continue talking about transformation of certain types of energy into electricity and in this case in this lecture we will talk about transformation of solar energy into electricity. The way how it's done is very different from the previous explanations of how for instance kinetic energy is transformed into electricity or chemical energy. So it's different and what's important is that in case of sun the energy of sun is free and if we are able to convert it into electricity, well great free energy. Well, it's not simple, but it is possible and that's where the solar panels are coming from. Now this lecture will not be about technical details of how solar panels are actually made. It's more about the principles of the functionality of the solar panels. These are purely theoretical principles and they are related to semiconductors. So I will have to talk about how semiconductors working. So basically again, this is not a technical lecture. It's a theoretical lecture. And I think it's very interesting and it's very important to understand actually what are the basic principles behind generation of electricity from sunlight. This lecture is part of the course. The course is called Physics for Teens. It's presented on Unisor.com. If you found this lecture on Unisor or anywhere else on sorry on YouTube or anywhere else, I suggest you to use rather the website Unisor.com which links to YouTube lecture because every lecture on Unisor has textual notes, which are basically like a textbook. So it's very useful not only to listen but also to read exactly the same thing. Well, almost exactly the same thing. And there are some nice pictures, which probably are much better than whatever I will try to picture here. Maybe some more detail formulas or something else. Plus the website contains exams for those who are interested in challenging themselves. And the website is completely free. Unisor has no advertising or anything else. Access is completely free. No strings attached. Okay, so let's talk about solar panels. Now, the main component of the solar panel is silicon. This is chemical formula for silicon. Now, what is silicon? It's an element. By the way, don't mix silicon and silicon with E letter at the end. This is an element, an elementary element which occurs in nature. The silicon with E is basically an artificially made chemical compound with silicon as a component, but it's a completely different thing. So we are not talking about silicon with E. We are talking about silicon like this one. Okay, and the chemical formula is Si. Well, it's interesting that silicon is probably one of the most frequently occurring element on Earth. Basically, it's part of the silica and it's basically sand. So there is a lot of silicon which we can actually use. So this is the main component of solar battery. Now what's important about silicon is it's not a metal, but it's not a dielectric either. So it doesn't conduct electricity as well as metals, but it doesn't really serve as a dielectric, which means completely inactive electrically. It's in between. Well, that's why it's called semiconductor, and that's why silicon is the main component in all the electronics which we have. It's all based on the principle of semi-conductivity, which I'm going to explain right now in some details. More details probably will be in a separate lecture about semiconductors. This is an application of semiconductors to solar energy usage. So structure of the atom of silicon is. It has 14 protons, certain number of neutrons. We are not talking about neutrons because we are interested only in electrical component and around this you have 14 electrons, but 14 electrons are not on the same orbit. They are actually on three orbits. One, two and three. You have two electrons here. You have eight electrons here, and you have four electrons here. So the most, the outermost orbit, which is actually the orbit where so-called valence electrons are located. Those which are related to chemical and other bonds with atom, with other atoms. It has only four. Now, on the website, I do have a picture of the structure of the crystalline structure of silicon. You see, these are four electrons. So there are four connections and other atoms also have four electrons on their outermost orbits. And electrons are actually connected. It's called covalent bond. So when many atoms are present, they are connected through these covalent bonds. And I will depict it as this. We have four electrons. Each one has four electrons. So that would be my flat representation of the structure of the crystalline structure of silicon. In reality, it's supposed to be a three-dimensional structure. And that's why I'm actually referring you to Unisor.com, where the notes for this same lecture contain a nice picture. The idea is, if you consider tetrahedron, which is basically like a triangle and this triangle, a pyramid. So in the center, you have an atom. And in four other angles, you have atoms. And that's how this represents a three-dimensional structure of the crystalline silicon. But on the flat surface, I will just for completely educational purposes. I will depict it as this. So each atom has four connections. So this is the inner structure of the crystalline silicon. So every crystal has a three-dimensional structure, which I will represent on the flat surface as this. And four connections means that each atom has four balance electrons, and they are connected among themselves, these electrons on the outermost orbits. They are connected into covalent bonds. And that's what makes the crystal. These covalent bonds are rather strong. Considering we are talking about electrons on the outermost orbits, probably their relationship between the atoms, I mean between the electrons, which are actually making these covalent bonds, is probably stronger than the relationship with the protons inside the nuclei. So again, the existence of these covalent bonds is very, very important for the whole semiconductor industry, if you wish. Now these atoms are neutral because the number of protons is 14 and the number of electrons is also 14. Two on the inner, eight on the middle, and four on the outer orbit. Okay, so it's neutral, which means if you will just, you know, connect, if you will try to measure its resistance. So you put some kind of probe with some voltage and you will try to measure the electricity, the current. You will not see much. Primarily because it's not a metal. So these electrons are really kind of strongly connected to each other. They're not like really free electrons. I mean they're relatively free, but not as free as in the metals. So basically you will not see a lot of conductivity. On the other hand, if you will heat it, which means you will excite electrons more, obviously, right? The heat energy is transferred into kinetic energy of the electrons. They will be a little bit more inclined to leave their place and go somewhere else. So the resistance would be diminishing and the conductivity will be increasing of these semiconductors with increase of the temperature. Or any other form of exciting, like for instance, sunlight. Sunlight also excites electrons, right? It's energy. Well, it's basically heat in some way or another. And that would be actually the principle. But again, right now, if you will just measure resistance, it would be very high. Even if you will, you know, increase the temperature or sunlight, it will increase a little bit the conductivity. But it will not be a source of electricity, obviously, because it's completely neutral. How can we make it a source of energy? How can we make sunlight? Even if it just, even if we will heat it or put sunlight, how can we make produce electricity? And that's the next topic. Okay. So the first thing which we do is we will slightly change this particular structure. We will introduce some impurity, some add-on. How, let's not talk about how, but there is a way to replace atom of silicon with atom of, let's say, phosphorus. The phosphorus chemical formula is P. What's interesting about phosphorus? Phosphorus has five electrons on its outer orbit. Actually, some other elements will do as well. So if it has five, it has one more electron here. So these are silica, silica. These are all silica. And a little bit of phosphorus somewhere here. Here you might have another silica and another silica and then another phosphorus, something like this. So whenever we introduce certain amount of phosphorus inside the silicon, I will have these electrons, extra electrons, which are not bonded to anything. So they're also on the outer orbit of atom, which means they are, well, might be a little freer than the others. But what's different between this free electron and the outer orbit of phosphorus and these four electrons, which are on the outer orbit of the silicon, these are related to other atoms and they're bonded through covalent bonds. This one doesn't have any covalent bond. So it's freer, so to speak. Well, what happens in this particular case? Well, it's relatively free. So you can just go somewhere. Where can it go? Well, for instance, it can go to another atom of silicon, replace it in the covalent bond. But that would free electron from silicon. So in this particular case, we will have certain number of electrons, but as many electrons as many atoms of phosphorus are introduced, right? So we will have these electrons, which are kind of floating around. They might replace electrons in in silica, which frees that electron, which they have replaced, and that one will go further. And all these wandering of electrons will definitely occur in the mixture of silicon and phosphorus. Why? Because phosphorus has one extra electron on its orbit. Now, the whole thing is still electrically neutral because phosphorus has one more proton, obviously, and one more electron. So the whole thing is electrically neutral. However, it more resembles like metals, for instance, which are electrically neutral, but there are many electrons which are relatively free, those from the outer orbits. They are not exactly, you know, strongly connected to to nuclear, and they can just jump to another atom, replace those electrons on the outer orbit, push them further, et cetera, et cetera. So this wandering of electrons occurs in this particular thing a little bit more like in the metals. OK. Now, this thing is called n-type, n stands for negative and negative because electrons are negative and we are having these floating wandering electrons. OK, let's consider a slightly different situation. Let's consider, instead of atom of phosphorus, we will add atoms of boron. Now, what's different here? Boron has three electrons on its outer orbit, less than four, and that's why I did not really put this connection. So this connection from this atom remains basically unattended. From the boron side, there is nothing. Well, they call it a hole, basically. So instead of extra electron, which is negatively charged in case we add phosphorus, we had we have an absence of an electron or again it's called a hole. Well, and what happens with this hole? Basically, it plays the role of positively charged particle. And it's also wandering around, it's floating, because, for instance, this electron becomes unbonded so it can jump to here. And that actually has extra electron in the boron. But extra hole here. And then this hole can be filled from, let's say, this electron and the hole will go here. So as soon as we have one missing electron, which is basically not connected, which really makes a hole in the covalent connection, this hole can wander around, can float around because in its place, some other electron can actually jump. So in this case, we have a different type of kind of an interesting material. It basically resembles metal, but not in a negative part, negative sense, but in a positive sense, because this hole actually means absence of electrons and the hole is floating around. The whole thing still, again, is electrically neutral, but there are positive holes floating around and that's why it's called p-type. So now we have not just a silicon, which is electrically neutral and stable without anything floating around inside. We have two kinds of semiconductors. We have a p-type semiconductor, which is silicon with some kind of impurity embedded in it atoms of boron. And some others, not only boron, some others as well can be edited to introduce the same effect. And also we have an n-type where extra electrons, in both cases, in p-type semiconductors and n-type semiconductors, we have certain particles. Well, in case of a hole, it's not really a particle, it's an absence of particle, but it plays exactly the same role. Something is floating around and basically introduces some carriers which we can use in some kind of an electrical scheme. And now, obviously, we are approaching how we do this particular thing. What if we will have the n-type semiconductor and connect it to this p-type? n-type has floating negative electrons. p-type has floating holes. I will use plus as a positive thing.  Well, if they are really close together, I mean really close, like contact, very nice contact, it's basically two relatively small disks, let's say, or squares of silicon with added impurities, impurity of producing n-type in one case and impurity of producing p-type in another case. And these two plates of silicon are just bonded together somehow. This area, now, electrons are floating, basically, right, and holes are floating around all the time, by themselves. Now, what happens in the borderline? Well, the borderline happens very interesting thing. When electron approaches here, hole approaches from here, well, electron is a negatively charged particle, hole is absence of this, so there is some kind of atom here with a missing bond, a missing link. It needs, well, it will bond together, basically. This electron will replace absent link of the atom here, and as I was saying, covalent links are very strong. They are probably stronger than the relationship between electron and nuclei. And that's why this bonding together happens. Now, as soon as we have this type of bonding together, what happens is this thing used to be electrically neutral, but now this electron comes here. It replaces absent link, bond together, but now we have one electron greater on the bottom part and one electron less on the top part. So this diffusion on the border between n-type and p-type causes the whole thing charged with minus here and plus here, because the electron comes here, used to be neutral, now it has a negative sign, and this one used to be neutral, but now it lost the electron, so it becomes positive. So in the immediate neighborhood of this borderline, there is this p-n junction, as they're saying, p-n junction where the electric charge actually exists. The part of the p-type which is close to the border becomes negative and part of the n-type which is close to the border becomes positive. So it's really built up up to a certain extent and then when the negative electricity in the bottom part becomes relatively strong, it prevents electrons from diffusion down and obviously the whole thing, the whole process stops. However, it stops only after certain electromotive force or voltage has been accumulated between these two plates. So the electrons which are accumulated in the borderline are probably again, can probably float around a little bit, maybe not, maybe yes, but these are very, very thin plates, so basically it doesn't really matter how deep it goes. What important is that the bottom plate is actually becomes negative and the top one, which is n-type, becomes positive. And there is certain voltage between them, not the big one, really very, very small one, but there is one. Now, what happens if we will start exciting electrons on the top? Well, we will increase their energy and if the layer of negative electrons was sufficient before to prevent other electrons to diffuse with excited electrons, it will probably go a little bit deeper and the more excitement we will introduce into electrons above, the bigger difference in the potential, electric potential between top and bottom plates will be, the more voltage will be really observed. And finally, if we will connect them with a wire, with some kind of a load or whatever, what happens then? Well, the accumulated electricity, negative electricity here will go back here and it will basically compensate this plus. But then again, it diminishes the negative potential of the bottom part and the diffusion again can start. So if we just have this particular thing, we will have electricity circulating. Now, if we will introduce the heat or sunlight or whatever else which excites from the top, from the n-type, we will have a more intense electricity and the more excited electrons are, the more intense diffusion will be there and therefore, the more voltage we will observe on this battery. Basically, that's the principle. As long as we have two different n-types and p-types, semi-conductor connected to each other, we will have this electricity flowing from this to this. But electrons will flow from here to here. The flow of electricity for whatever reasons is from positive to negative. So it's opposite to electrons and so the arrow will be here. Okay, so this is the main principle. Now, how do we actually make it? Well, again, as I was saying, we have two different silicon plates. One with introduced impurity which makes it n-type. Another introduced impurity which makes it p-type. Let's say phosphorus and boron. And then, if we will introduce sunlight as an exciting factor for electrons, well, then we will have basically the electricity. Now, in practice, usually there are not very big ones, these silicon plates, but then you can connect them in series, one after another after another, which will increase their combined voltage. So usually they are making, let's say, squares, something like this, and they combine a certain number of squares into big flat surface, which is basically called solar panels. And then you introduce basically a certain number of solar panels, you put it on a roof or whatever, and they will produce certain electricity. Now, I did not discuss any technical aspects. How do we connect it to the electrical grid, to any kind of devices, etc. Deliberately, this is not the purpose of the lecture. The purpose of the lecture is to explain this particular principle, the PN junction and its role in creating the electricity. And this PN junction mechanism is used like everywhere we see electronics, in all the televisions, computers, etc., etc. It's all built on this principle. That's why it's very important to understand it. I'll probably talk about this more whenever I will talk about electronics and semiconductors. But I just wanted to, and I'll probably repeat more or less what I just said, but in this particular case, this structure, the structure of the atoms of silicon with certain impurities and the PN junction, that's something which you have to really remember and understand. That's it for today. Thank you very much. And good luck. By the way, I do suggest you to read on the Unisor.com. I do suggest you to read the notes for this lecture and look at the nice pictures, much better than whatever I put here. Okay, take care. Thank you.


a fixed momentary DR0. DR0. DR0. DR0. DR0.  I'll let you think about it. I think there might even be a rant on our channel somewhere about that. I don't really remember where it is, but I remember ranting about it. But I've ranted about it a lot, so I really don't know. So what we could be thinking about here is, you know, maybe you're the one doing the, what is it called? What was it called? A fixed momentary DR0 is like, you're going to look up after a given fixed amount of time. And at that moment, if anything other than the problem behavior is occurring, you're going to deliver reinforcers. Okay? All right? So a fixed moment in time, you're going to deliver a reinforcer if the problem behavior is not occurring. And I know that sounds weird because it's a DR0 and a DR0, and they're really just differential reinforcement of other behavior or zero rates of the problem behavior. But an organism can't not respond unless they're dead. So they're doing something, right? So you're going to reinforce other behavior at that particular moment. Maybe it's every five minutes, whatever it is. So fixed momentary, and you're going to just take a peek. Is that behavior occurring? Reinforce if it's not, and just reinforce whatever behavior is occurring. That's it.


This paper provides an overview of electroencephalogram, e.g., data analysis tools and their associated processes. It also defines terms relevant to e.g., data analysis and provides a list of tools for further research. This article was authored by Rupak Kumar Das, Anna Martin, Tom Zerales, and others.


This research proposes a new method for monitoring the effects of apple mosaic virus, APMV, on apple leaves by using hyperspectral imaging, HSI. The HSI technique was used to identify specific wavelengths that are most indicative of the presence of APMV, which was then combined with other factors such as the leaf's chemical makeup and its chlorophyll content to create a more accurate assessment of the leaf's health. This assessment was then used to determine the level of disease severity, allowing growers to take action before the disease spreads further. This article was authored by Yen Fulu, Yu Zhong, Danyao Jiang, and others.


Kyiv reports 500 new Russian casualties. Ukraine's Defence Ministry says Russian forces have suffered huge losses as they try to capture the salt mining town of Soledad city. During the Christmas truce, Russian troops reportedly regrouped to capture Soledad in the Donetsk region. About 200 kilometres of disused tunnels around Soledad are also considered a target zone. According to the information announced by the Ukrainian General Staff on the morning of January the 11th, Russia suffered 490 casualties the day before. It is claimed that Russia's death toll in the war so far has reached 113,000. On January the 10th, Yevgeny Prigozhin, the head of the Wagner mercenary group, which was at the forefront of the Soledad attack, claimed that they had almost captured the city, but heavy fighting was going on somewhere in the city centre. Ukrainian officials say fighting is still going on for Soledad. The capture of the Soledad and the salt mines will have symbolic military and commercial value for Russia and will be Moscow's biggest success in recent months. It is a country of masochists. Despite suffering huge losses, Russia is still maniacally trying to capture Soledad. Europe's largest salt mine, the Ministry of Defence of Ukraine, tweeted.


Welcome to TickMail Weekly Market Outlook for week menacing the 30th of September with me, Patrick Munnally. Looking for a busy week of top-tier data in the US this week with more information to assess the state of the US economy. Key releases include Tuesday's factory activity gauge, the ISM Manufacturing Index, which had surprised with a contraction in August. Weakness is expected to continue with another sub-50 reading market consensus. The ISM Non-Manufacturing Index is due Wednesday. The services sector is expected to remain supported by red bus consumer demand. As usual, the official gauges were also accompanied by the concurrent release of the final readings of market PMIs for both the manufacturing and services sectors. In addition to the PMI readings, the official job report comprising of non-farm payrolls, unemployment rates and wage growth alongside is due on Friday. Markets look for the nascent softer trend to continue to develop. The week will be wrapped up with US trade data, with US dollar strength and trade negotiations continuing to weigh on non-oil exports. So now we have an understanding of the fundamental drivers for the weekend. Let's take a quick look at what the technicals are saying. The dollar index has duly retested prior cycle highs towards a nice 930 area. We've been unable to take those out at the current's advance. And if we stall here, there's the potential to put in quite a meaningful double top. Note the momentum divergence that continues to weigh. And as such, if we fail to break new highs here, break new ground to the upside, then I'll be looking for a pullback or corrected phase back towards the 9750 area. However, if we do take out the current cycle highs, then I'm looking for the next phase of resistance to occur at the 9970, which represents the yearly R1 pivots. Are we looking for bearish reversal patterns in and around this level to set short positions? Again, looking for a corrective phase back to test this 9750 support area. Once we're checking in with the dollar, let's take a look at what gold's been doing. Gold duly tested up to the anticipated resistance in the 1535 area. And as search sellers stepped in, we now see the potential for an equality objective down at the 1460 area. However, if we fail to take out the support in the 1480 area, look for further consolidation and likely retest of offers back towards the 1535 level. In Canada, a pair of releases, one old and one new, will restore a bit of interest in the domestic calendar. But external risks are likely to continue to dominate market influences. First up will be what happened to the GDP growth in July, trade figures for August are due on Friday and will advance understanding of the impact of the global weaknesses. The loony has continued to consolidate in a relatively tight range between 133 and 13250 from most of last week. As 133 continues to act as resistance, then I'm anticipating a test of the equality objective down towards 131. However, if we hold the range support at the 13250 and can't track lower, then I'd be looking for an equality upside objective to retest prior cycle highs at the 13380 area. In Europe, the main data to watch out for is Monday's employment data, which has started to trend lower. Tuesday sees manufacturing PMI with recent German weakness likely to weigh. Thursday will see the services PMI readings. Once again, labour market strength likely supports in the services sector. The euro broke to new year lows this week, testing down towards support at the 109 area. And we consolidated within the test zone that we placed when we made the Thursday low and we had closed with an inside bearish inside bar on Friday. However, if we can hold that potential double bottom there, then I see a test of the descending trend line resistance at the 11040 as the next upside objective. However, if we do take out last week's lows, then I'll be looking for a swift move down to test the descending trend line support down to the 108 area. Again, similar to the dollar index, note the consistent divergence from a momentum perspective, which suggests that we can still likely form a base here to test higher in the euro. Whilst we're checking it with the euro, let's take a look at what's going on with the DAX. The DAX held the anticipated support zone at the 12,200 level. As this level survives now, I'll be looking for a new high to test the 12,700 level. Once we get up into this area, I'll be watching for intraday reversal patterns to set short positions, targeting a move down to test the projected ascending trend line support back down at 12,100. Across the channel in the UK, the final reading of second quarter GDP growth is due Monday, followed by market PMI's Tuesday, its manufacturing readings weighed likely by the Brexit uncertainties. Thursday's services reading could also be hampered by political pressures, leading to potential recession concerns. Sterling duly pulled back from the resistance area highlighted in last week's analysis, and we're now testing the anticipated support zone back down towards the 12,285 area. As this area acts as support, there's the potential to build another leg of upside to retest the prior highs back up towards the 126 level. However, a failure below 122 will be a bearish development, opening a retest of bids down to 120. PMI readings make up most of the Asian docket in Japan, aside from industrial production, retail sales, the jobless rate and market PMI's. Market watchers will be paying close attention to the Bank of Japan's quarterly tank and survey released Tuesday, which provides a gauge of the country's large and small business capex and general outlook with both global and domestic weakness, Unlikely small capex, particularly in the manufacturing sector. The Dollar Yen duly held the anticipated support zone of 107, and as it does, there's the potential to complete a sequence now to test offers above 10950. However, a failure back below 107 will extend the correction, and we could see an equality objective test back down towards 10650 before trying to make another leg of upside recovery. Down under in Australia, Tuesday's RBA is expected to cut the cash rate to 0.75% in response to global and domestic challenges. Friday we'll see August retail sales, which will likely be softer than expected, although tax cuts could provide some temporary boost. From a technical perspective, the Australian Dollar has pulled back to test the 67 level of support. If I step in here, I still see an opportunity for another leg of corrective upside to test offers towards the descending trend line resistance at the 69 level. However, a failure below 67 will be a bearish development, opening a move down to test support to the 66 level. And that concludes the weekly market outlook for week commencing 30th of September.


Despite months and months of negotiations, the Iran nuclear deal is still not close to being clinched. After the Russia-Ukraine war broke out and European countries became desperate for oil, it seemed a deal would happen very soon. However, despite the Europeans striving really hard and the Iranians willing to make compromises, we are no closer to an agreement. Recently, the European Union's chief diplomat Sepp Paul said that the deal was in danger. Why is the deal not in the bag despite everyone seeming to be in its favour? Who is playing spoil-spot? Rania Khalek of Breakthrough News explains. That would have them back under this strict monitoring regulation of this international agency of their uranium enrichment. And that would severely limit their ability to enrich uranium. But the Iranians are saying that this is actually not something that they're not willing to agree to. They would be willing to agree to this. The problem is that the Americans are refusing to guarantee the lifting of sanctions. And for the Iranians, that is the ultimate issue here is the sanctions. And if the Americans can't guarantee the lifting of the sanctions, then Iran really has nothing to gain from this deal. But I do want to emphasize that this time around, you know, there are, as every time, there are several different players with a vested interest in the Iran deal, either making it happen or blocking it. And that's important to keep in mind too. And here I raised the issue of the Israelis. The Israelis, of course, are aligned with American neocons and doing everything in their power to prevent this deal. And Israeli Prime Minister Yair Lapid actually went on like a lobbying tour, basically advocating against the deal, begging the Americans not to let it happen. And part of this is due to the fact that elections are coming up in Israel. And Netanyahu has been attacking Lapid as like being soft on Iran. So he wants to look strong. But also the Israelis want Iran isolated and weak. And a deal would, a nuclear deal would bring Iran back into the international economic system because it would come with some sanctions relief. So the Israelis aren't like really scared. They're not actually scared that Iran will obtain a nuclear weapon. Everyone knows that the Iranians aren't trying to obtain a nuclear weapon. Had they wanted to, they could have already. What this is really about is they don't want Iran's economy to flourish because they believe that if Iran has a healthy economy, it can then give more funding and weapons to its resistance allies across the region like Hezbollah, that act as a deterrence against the Israeli aggression and of course as well as the Palestinians. So the Israelis want the Iranian economy to continue to be in ruins over sanctions. And this is of course while Israel continues its campaign of like sabotage against Iran and its regional allies. They're constantly taking credit for sabotaging not just the nuclear deal, but also trying to, you know, kill or assassinate Iranian scientists. Sabotaging Iranian ships and these sorts of things. So all that said, Lapid is also trying to use this as a way to like increase his poll numbers ahead of elections. So there's always like an Israeli election element to this. The Americans, however, are saying, well they've actually told the Israelis don't worry the deals on like stalled for now. That, like I mentioned, has to do with the Americans adding demands that they're not willing to budger on surrounding uranium enrichment. So they want Iran to give up all enriched uranium that they have been enriching throughout the time that the US ripped up the deal. Anything that's been enriched to 20% and 60% that's in Iran's possession. They want them to give that up, which would be like hundreds of kilograms of enriched uranium. And they want them to remove that from Iran and then take whatever they have stored out of like Iranian possession and basically put it under the possession of the International Atomic Energy Agency, the IAEA, which would then continue with strict monitoring of Iran's nuclear facilities. And the Americans are saying that the Iranians are refusing to allow the strict monitoring. And I think it's important to note here that this is actually a violation of sovereignty. I mean, no other country has to expose themselves to this level of strict monitoring. This is purely just because it's Iran, no other kind. I mean, Israel literally has, it's the only country in the Middle East that actually has nuclear weapons. And that's not even an official admission. Everybody just knows they do. And there's no monitoring whatsoever of their uranium enrichment or anybody else's just the Iranians to this strict level. The Iranians are saying that they're still not receiving any American guarantees that if they sign a deal the Americans will abide by it and not allow the next administration to rip it up like Trump did. And the Iranians for their part are also saying that they are in fact willing to accept the verification of their nuclear activities, even to the extremely strict level of the IAEA. Only if the parties who signed the 2015 nuclear deal fulfilled their obligations to lift the sanctions against Iran. And I mean, as far as they see it, why should Iran right have to abide by these measures if the other side doesn't have to abide by theirs. And Iran actually did abide by those strict measures for a year after the deal was torn up by the US to see if others would continue to abide by the deal. At one point it was just the violations by the United States were just too outrageous. The Europeans were starting to join in on the sanctions that the US was placing under the Trump administration on the Iranians. So the Iranian parliament actually ratified a bill that obliges the government to expand the country's nuclear activities in response to the violations committed by the American side. Of course, none of this is ever mentioned in the Western press, it's just whatever Americans say is the problem so Iran is constantly getting blamed for this deal being stalled. And I mean the last thing I'll mention here is that there's also domestic politics inside the US to consider. You know the deal is stalled now, and according to Israeli media the Biden administration right gave them a guarantee not to worry that there won't be a deal. To do with the fact that you know Biden may have been interested in restoring the deal when he first became president, but it seems that now that interest has faded because it doesn't really benefit him in the upcoming midterm elections Americans don't care about the Iran deal right now. So I mean, as far as like the horse race politics of America is concerned there's nothing that Biden really has to gain from re-entering a deal with Iran if anything, it might even just give his Republican counterpart something to use against him, saying that you know you're soft on Iran you're soft on terrorism. That likely has something to do with the American lack of real interest in doing this. In the meantime the US has continued to sanction Iran, you know denying them like access to food and medicine, and all the kinds of horrible things destroying their economy that comes with sanctions they continue to steal Iranian oil and sell it, which is just like straight up piracy, while the Americans are constantly approved like approving of Israeli sabotage efforts of Iran which again includes assassinating their scientists bombing, you know supposed Iranian militias in Syria. The Americans I think are just they care about Ukraine right now, not Iran. And at the moment though the reason I raise Ukraine is because besides Iran you know another loser in all of this is actually the Europeans because the Europeans are so desperate to increase global output, and to do you know in order to decrease oil prices, as well as you know they want to find another gasoline or another source of gas, their source of energy since they have basically sanctioned themselves with their sanctions on Russia their only way to increase energy exporter until now. So, and you know, as the Iranians keep reminding the Europeans winter is coming, and the Europeans are looking at a very tough winter ahead, possibly with energy rationing maybe even some power cuts, people are not going to be able to afford their electricity bill. And so they're really worried about this leading to chaos and instability in Europe. They were really hoping for a deal they were even hoping to maybe have a specific European Iranian deal that maybe didn't even include the Americans. But unfortunately that's not even happening as we've seen with the war in Ukraine European leaders are perfectly willing to sacrifice their people for us empire. Rather than just pushing forward with an agreement with Iran, they've essentially gone along with the US, and not just enacting sanctions against Iran that they don't even want with Iran they don't really benefit from sanctions with Iran. It would actually behooved them to have Iran as a trade partner, but the Europeans are also echo echoing the American side against Iran.


Hey everyone, it's Gabrielle and I'm over here at Oxmer Toyota today. You guys I have a 2021 This is the Toyota CHR now This is the night shade and currently this is the only one in this color Available for sale right now in Kentucky.  You have black door handles Now moving on to the back you're going to have the black badging so you can see that CHR the black Toyota symbol now, why don't we jump on in? onto the interior So you're going to have an 8 inch touchscreen the vehicle does have six speakers You're going to have Bluetooth Apple CarPlay Android Auto now the vehicle also has that Toyota Safety Sense 2 2.5 so you're going to have pre-collision system with the pedestrian detection You'll have lane departure alert. You do have automatic high beams You have the lane tracing assist with roadside assist and there is 10 standard airbags on this vehicle And then for that interior you are going to have the black fabric seating All right guys now if you have any questions on this vehicle I feel free to let us know all of our contact information is listed right here. All right everyone I will see you all soon. Thanks. Bye