How local councils use zoning and development permits to do what decriminalisation took away from the police.
Melbourne and Brisbane case study
Decriminalisation in Victoria and Queensland was sold as a public health and workplace reform. The central promise was not simply that police would step back, but that sex workers would be safer, healthier, and better able to access legal protections and support services. But did shifting regulation from criminal law to planning law help achieve those goals? Or have local councils just become the new gatekeeper.
From policing sex work to planning sex work
Victoria completed decriminalisation in December 2023, abolishing the former licensing regime and removing planning provisions that singled out brothels for special treatment. Sex services premises are now generally assessed like other businesses, with many able to operate in Commercial 1 Zones without a planning permit.
Queensland adopted a similar model in August 2024, removing sex work-specific planning categories and preventing councils from creating local laws that specifically regulate sex work. Sex work businesses are instead assessed under ordinary categories such as shops and home-based businesses.
Both reforms were based on a public health rationale. The Victorian Department of Health states that evidence shows decriminalisation helps create safer working environments, reduces stigma and discrimination, improves access to healthcare and support services, and strengthens STI and blood-borne-virus prevention efforts.
What has changed is the mechanism of control. Police and licensing inspectors have largely been replaced by planners, compliance officers, zoning maps and development assessments.
Why safety was central to decriminalisation
The Queensland Law Reform Commission concluded that criminalised and heavily regulated models increase vulnerability to exploitation and violence because workers are forced to choose between working legally and working safely. The Commission found existing laws discouraged workers from collaborating, limited access to workplace protections, and created barriers to reporting crimes to police.
A key objective of decriminalisation was therefore to allow sex workers to operate like workers in other industries. Queensland's reforms expressly seek to improve the health, safety, rights and legal protections of sex workers.
In Victoria, decriminalisation also removed mandatory quarterly STI testing and sex-work-specific health offences. The government argued that punitive public health measures can create barriers to healthcare rather than improve outcomes.
What the evidence says about health outcomes
The strongest evidence so far suggests that decriminalisation has not harmed public health outcomes.
A 2025 survey of 101 Victorian sex workers found that:
- 88% reported no change in condom use for giving oral sex after decriminalisation
- 90.8% reported no change in condom use for receiving oral sex
- 91.3% reported no change in condom use for receptive vaginal sex
- 60.6% reported no change in STI and blood-borne-virus testing frequency
Researchers concluded that sex workers largely maintained already high rates of condom use and regular testing following decriminalisation, suggesting reforms did not negatively affect sexual health practices.
The Victorian Department of Health also reports that a 2022 needs assessment found Victorian sex workers generally have high levels of sexual health literacy, low STI and blood-borne-virus rates, regular testing practices, and consistent condom use at work.
Planning controls and workplace safety
The challenge is that health and safety outcomes depend not only on decriminalisation itself, but on how local planning systems operate in practice.
Planning controls determine where workers can operate, whether they can work collectively, and how visible their businesses can be. These decisions have direct safety implications.
Research reviewed by the Queensland Law Reform Commission found that restrictions preventing sex workers from working together can undermine safety by increasing isolation and reducing opportunities for mutual support and screening of clients. The Commission explicitly noted that existing laws prevented workers from adopting safe work practices and operating in ways they considered safest.
Under both Victorian and Queensland planning frameworks, most compliance disputes are now framed as amenity, parking, visitor numbers, operating hours or neighbourhood character issues rather than sex-work issues. However, the practical result can still be limitations on where and how workers operate.
For larger businesses, navigating permits and planning appeals is often manageable. For smaller operators and independent workers, planning costs and uncertainty often creates barriers to legal operation. Those barriers matter because evidence consistently shows that workers operating outside formal regulatory systems are less likely to access workplace protections and legal remedies.
The New Zealand lesson
New Zealand's decriminalised model provides the longest-running example of what happens when sex work is regulated primarily through ordinary laws rather than criminal sanctions.
Research conducted three years after New Zealand's 2003 reforms found that a majority of sex workers felt they had more rights and were better able to refuse clients than before decriminalisation. Participants also reported improved relationships with police. Subsequent studies found decriminalisation better supported safety strategies, particularly for street-based workers.
Importantly, New Zealand's experience suggests the greatest benefits come when workers can exercise workplace rights without fear of criminal penalties. Planning systems that recreate barriers to legal operation risk undermining some of these gains.
Has planning law become the new regulator?
In Melbourne and Brisbane, the evidence suggests that planning law has become the primary site of regulation, but not necessarily a direct replacement for criminalisation.
From a public health and welfare perspective, decriminalisation appears to be producing the outcomes policymakers intended: reduced stigma, maintained sexual health standards, improved access to services, and stronger workplace rights.
The unresolved issue is whether local planning systems use ostensibly neutral tools, such as zoning restrictions and amenity assessments, in ways that disproportionately affect sex workers. While councils can no longer rely on criminal offences or special licensing frameworks, they still retain significant influence over where businesses may operate and under what conditions.
The result is a more hushed form of regulation. The debate is no longer about arrests, raids or licences. It is about mundane planning permits, home-based business codes, parking assessments and neighbourhood objections. For sex workers, these decisions can have real consequences for workplace safety, economic security and access to legal protections.
The evidence so far suggests that decriminalisation itself improves health and safety outcomes. The next question is whether planning systems will support those gains or gradually erode them through local discretion.