Women's Charter (Amendment) Bill

Order for Second Reading read.

2.28 pm

The Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Home Affairs (Ms Sun Xueling) (for the Minister for Home Affairs): Mr Speaker, Sir, on behalf of the Minister for Home Affairs, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time."

The Bill before us amends the provisions of the Women’s Charter dealing with offences against women and girls. These amendments strengthen our levers against syndicates that organise and facilitate prostitution, or "vice syndicates".

Vice syndicates have exploited technology to transform the way they operate, with apps and websites making it easier and more discreet than ever to: (a) advertise sexual services; (b) communicate with one another and with prospective clients; and (c) arrange payment.

What this means is that: syndicates can now remotely control their operations from anywhere in the world; they can introduce layers in their operations to evade detection, but retain command and control by using these e-communication and e-payment platforms; and they can easily move from one residential unit to another, by renting these units to be used as "pop-up brothels".

This has brought about disamenities in the neighbourhoods and has made it more challenging for law enforcement. Let me share two examples.

My first example is a typical experience faced by neighbours of units used for vice. "Mdm Jane" and her neighbours observed many unfamiliar male visitors going in and out of one of their neighbours’ unit. Imagine what "Mdm Jane" must have felt to see these men loitering near her home and the impact on her sense of safety for her teenage daughter. "Mdm Jane" made a Police report, and Police enforcement uncovered two females providing sexual services within the unit.

My second example highlights some of the challenges faced by law enforcement because of changes in syndicates’ modus operandi. Last year, the Singapore Police Force and China's Ministry of Public Security conducted simultaneous raids across multiple locations in Singapore and China. They arrested 36 syndicate members, including the key masterminds and agents based in China. This led to the disruption of a major vice website targeting clients in Singapore.

While the Police could previously focus their resources to dismantle vice syndicates operating within certain areas of Singapore, now, these syndicates are all over the world. It is increasingly difficult and complicated to dismantle these syndicates, and requires significant collaboration with foreign agencies. We need to do more to address the rise in online vice.

To give a sense of how much online vice has grown in recent years: in 2015, the proportion of females arrested for online vice, compared to all types of platform, was 16%. In 2018, this proportion had increased to 55%.

Another startling statistic: between 2015 and 2018, seven in 10 foreign females arrested for online vice, were providing sexual services in residential estates.

So, it is necessary to strengthen our levers against vice syndicates and individuals, especially those operating through online means. This will also ensure better protection for our neighbourhoods against vice activities.

I will now go through the key amendments of the Bill.

The first amendment targets syndicates that attempt to evade enforcement by moving parts of their operations overseas. Currently, it is an offence under section 146A if a person in Singapore, operates or maintains in Singapore a remote communication service to offer or facilitate the provision of sexual services in Singapore. But a webmaster in Singapore who relies on an overseas server to host his website to deliver sexual services in Singapore, would not run afoul of this section today.

Clause 10 amends section 146A so that it has extra-territorial application. The offence will be extended extra-territorially in two ways.

First, it will apply to persons based outside Singapore, and second, it will apply to persons who use platforms based overseas. For example, a person in Singapore using a website server based overseas.

In order for the extended offence to be made out, two conditions must be met.

First, the remote communication service has to be used to offer or facilitate the provision, by a woman or girl, of sexual services in Singapore.

Second, the remote communication service has to have a Singapore-link; namely, that a person physically present in Singapore is capable of having access to matters communicated using that service.

This extra-territorial application for section 146A will allow the Police to more effectively target trans-national vice syndicates.

Second, the Bill increases penalties for vice offences in Part XI of the Women's Charter so as to more appropriately reflect the seriousness of these offences, and to better deter vice activities.

There are three parts to this amendment.

First, higher maximum fines to match the profits derived from vice crimes. Today, a syndicate member can easily earn $100,000 in a year, and this far exceeds the current maximum fine of $10,000. The Bill therefore raises the maximum fines, to take into account the potential earnings of syndicates, and also inflation over the years.

Second, longer maximum jail terms to raise the sentencing benchmarks for vice offences.

Third, heavier penalties for second and subsequent conviction, for all vice-related offences in Part XI of the Women's Charter. Currently, only some offences carry heavier penalties for re-offending. But given the severity of vice offences, we need to take a stronger stand to better deter repeat offenders, regardless of their role in the conduct or delivery of the vice activities.

The revised penalty framework is as follows.

For the less serious offences, such as an offence committed by an owner whose place was used as a brothel under section 148, on first conviction, a maximum jail term of five years, or maximum fine of $100,000, or both. This is up from the current maximum jail term of three years, or maximum fine of $3,000, or both.

On second or subsequent conviction, a maximum jail term of seven years, or maximum fine of $150,000, or both. This is up from the current maximum jail term of five years, or maximum fine of $10,000, or both.

For the more serious offences, such as living off the earnings of prostitution under section 146, on first conviction, a mandatory jail term of up to seven years, and a discretionary maximum fine of $100,000. This is up from the current mandatory maximum jail term of five years, and a discretionary maximum fine of $10,000.

On second or subsequent conviction, a mandatory jail term of up to 10 years, and a discretionary maximum fine of $150,000. This is up from the current discretionary maximum fine of $10,000; there is no change to the current maximum jail term.

The third amendment relates to promoting the responsible lease of premises, to deter "pop-up brothels". "Pop-up brothels" are on the rise, especially in residential estates. The Police frequently receive complaints from the neighbours of such residential units. No one wants vice activities in their blocks or even on their streets.

Clause 12 makes it clearer in law, the responsibilities of owners, tenants and other parties involved in the lease of any premises. This is necessary because syndicates commonly exploit the lack of checks at the point of leasing by misusing identity documents, in order to secure premises for vice activities.

For example, there have been cases of syndicates using false identities, and even a deceased person’s identity documents to rent a property. Such misuse is problematic also because it makes it harder for Police to track down the offenders.

We want to deprive vice syndicates of operating space, and safeguard the tranquility and safety of our neighbourhoods. To do so, we need the vigilance of three key stakeholders: (a) owners who rent out their properties; (b) tenants who rent from the landlords and sub-let the premises to someone else; and (c) property agents who facilitate these lease and sub-lease transactions.

For property owners and tenants, clause 12 amends section 148 subsections (3) and (4) such that: an owner who rents out, or a tenant who sub-lets, a place which is used as a brothel, will be criminally liable unless he or she can show that, at the time of entering into the letting of that place, he or she had no knowledge and could not, with reasonable diligence, have ascertained that the place was to be used as a brothel.

A similar amendment is made to subsection (2), for tenants, lessees, occupiers or persons in charge of a place.

Property owners and tenants should also start asking the right questions when they rent out their properties. For example, who are the people they are letting the place to? Will these people be staying there, or will they be allowing other parties to use the place? Responsible property owners and tenants would already be asking these questions today, when leasing out their premises. These amendments simply provide more clarity to all owners and tenants on what they should do.

To help property owners and tenants understand what constitutes "reasonable diligence", we have included two illustrations.

First, owners and tenants should conduct identity checks of a prospective tenant or sub-tenant and the purpose of the tenancy or sub-tenancy, through face-to-face interviews, before leasing the place. This can help ensure that the person they are transacting with is indeed who he or she claims to be and is not misusing another person’s identity document.

Second, if the owner is overseas, he should engage an agent or trusted person to conduct these face-to-face interviews on his behalf. The owner should verify that the agent or trusted person has indeed carried out these checks.

These illustrations serve as guides to property owners and tenants. However, whether "reasonable diligence" was exercised would eventually depend on the specific facts of the case. For example, if a property owner had already been warned by the Police that his flat could have been used as a brothel, the owner might be expected to do more to ensure that no brothel is operating at that flat.

We have consulted stakeholders extensively in developing this proposal, so that property owners and tenants are not overly burdened, while still ensuring that they exercise responsibility over their premises, and that they play their part in deterring syndicates from using their premises for vice.

Such checks are actually not new. There is already a statutory requirement under the Immigration Act, for property owners to conduct identity checks of foreign tenants to ensure that there is no harbouring of immigration offenders. This has been in place since 1993 and property owners have largely complied. These amendments are intended to get property owners to extend the identity checks to Singapore Citizen and Permanent Resident tenants and sub-tenants as well, so as to guard against premises being misused for vice activities.

The large majority of property owners and tenants who are law-abiding and acting in good faith will not have to worry. In each case, the Police will conduct investigations to establish the facts, and take enforcement actions only where warranted.

Property agents also have a critical role in keeping our neighbourhoods safe. They should discharge their professional duties responsibly, and these are aligned to the reasonable diligence that we expect of property owners who lease out their premises and tenants who sub-let.

Property agents should guide property owners and tenants on what should be done in exercising reasonable diligence. And, if property agents detect any suspicious transactions themselves, they should proactively document and report the matter to the Police.

We are working with the Council for Estate Agencies (CEA) to provide guidelines to the industry. Last month, I met with representatives from the industry to have a dialogue on these upcoming changes, and they gave many useful suggestions on how we can partner the industry to keep vice out of neighbourhoods.

Where agents are found to have been negligent in carrying out their professional duties, they may be liable for regulatory action by CEA under the Estate Agents Act. For instance, if the property agent does not comply with his or her professional duties which will include conducting identity checks on the parties involved in the lease transactions, the property agent may be penalised monetarily, or have his or her registration suspended or revoked by CEA.

More critically, errant property agents who intentionally facilitate any lease transaction with the knowledge that it would lead to vice activities at the premises, are likely to face prosecution for abetting the commission of an offence under the Women's Charter, or other relevant laws.

Lastly, we are making some miscellaneous amendments to ensure that Police enforcement remains effective against the changing modus operandi of vice syndicates.

First, clause 2 broadens the definition of "brothel" to include any place that has been advertised or represented as being used for the purpose of prostitution and is likely to be used for the purpose of prostitution. Currently, a brothel is defined as a place that is used by at least two women or girls, whether at the same time or at different times, for the purposes of prostitution.

Syndicates have transformed the way they conduct their business, so that they circumvent the current definition of brothel, and avoid getting caught for vice offences.

Earlier, I mentioned that syndicates would rent various residential units and shift from one to another to evade detection, effectively functioning as a "pop-up". Each of these sex workers may also present herself as a lone operator. These new modus operandi make it harder to prove that the premises are being used as brothels, as currently defined, even though it is clear from advertisements online that they are being used for prostitution.

We are, therefore, amending the definition of a "brothel", to enable the Police to take effective and decisive enforcement action.

Clause 2 also simplifies the onus of proof on the part of the prosecution seeking to prove that a place is being used as a brothel. The clause makes clear an existing practice on the use of indirect evidence to prove that a place is being used as a brothel. For example, chat logs of appointments being made for prostitution services to be provided at the place would be allowed to be submitted as evidence that a place is being used as a brothel.

Second, clause 3 amends section 140 subsection (1)(d) to make it clear that it is an offence for a person to bring into Singapore, receive or harbour any woman or girl for prostitution. Currently, only agents who bring into Singapore, receive or harbour a woman or girl who has been procured are liable for the offence. The amendment will allow the Police to arrest a pimp or agent, even if the woman or girl is a free-lance sex worker and therefore cannot be said to have been "procured" by anyone.

Third, clause 10 amends section 146A to change the element of "operating or maintaining a remote communication service" for the provision of sexual service to that of "using" a remote communication service for that purpose. This is to make clear that our intent is to also target syndicates that use such a service, for example, vice agents who rely on messaging platforms provided by an internet intermediary, and not the company operating and maintaining the service, such as telcos and Internet Service Providers.

Lastly, clause 15 amends section 174 subsection (1) to extend the powers of arrest to the offence of using a remote communication service under section 146A. This will enable the Police to also exercise powers of arrest with respect to syndicate members who use a remote communication service for the provision of sexual services. Currently, this offence is not arrestable.

To conclude, this Bill is part of our larger vice management strategy, which includes working with our partners on upstream education and deterrence. Mr Speaker, I would just like to conclude in Mandarin.

(In Mandarin) [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.]: These amendments are necessary to strengthen our levers against vice activities, in particular, against increasingly widespread online vice activities that have caused disamenities in our neighbourhoods and disturbances to the residents.

While Government agencies actively investigate these cases to prevent vice activities from taking root in our neighbourhoods, all of us have a part to play.

As property owners, we must stay vigilant when renting out our premises and not wait until after leasing to find out that something is wrong, or turn a blind eye on suspicious activities. When renting out the premises, the property owners should know who the tenants are. Some people may misuse other people's identities to conduct illegal activities. Therefore, the property owner should conduct identity checks to verify that the person is who he claims to be.

Property agents must also go about their work professionally, and do due diligence by helping to check on the identities of the potential tenants. If they detect any suspicious transactions, they should inform property owners and report to the Police.

As a community, we can also do our part to stop vice activities from taking root in the heartlands. If we find any suspicious activities in the neighbourhood, do not hesitate to report to the Police immediately. If all of us can increase our vigilance and do our part, we will be able to keep our neighbourhoods safe and stop vice activities from spreading.

(In English): Mr Speaker, I beg to move.

Question proposed.

2.50 pm

Er Dr Lee Bee Wah (Nee Soon): Mr Speaker, Sir, we would have read of news reports about several prostitution syndicates rounded up by our Police. These syndicates were conducting their business on the internet and some are even based overseas, as what Senior Parliamentary Secretary has shared with us just now. Hence, the proposed regulations to bring harsher punishments to such syndicates are timely.

I note that the Police has arrested people in a Telegram group that was sharing obscene videos and photos of women. Some media reports also alleged that independent sex workers, or perhaps even their syndicates, were advertising sexual services in the group. How will the amendments help in such cases? Will they help us to round up those who are advertising sexual services from overseas? Do the anonymity clauses hinder investigations and if so, do we need stronger laws in this respect?

I support firm action against homeowners and tenants who knowingly let out their premises for vice activities. Certainly, they should be held responsible.

However, I disagree that conducting identity checks at the point of signing lease agreements could be helpful in determining the tenant’s motives. I note that the Council for Estate Agencies (CEA), property agencies and agents will be brought in to assist homeowners and tenants to conduct due diligence checks. This is a commendable move that will help the less knowledgeable property owners. However, a respectable local or foreigner with all their paperwork in order could rent the place, and then lie low for the first few weeks of occupancy, before beginning their operations behind the backs of the property owners. Some landlords might also be overseas and not be able to conduct checks. Is it fair to hold landlords responsible for tenants' actions under such circumstances?

In my opinion, it would be more meaningful for homeowners and property agents to establish a communication channel with neighbours and managing agent, if any. These people are better positioned to blow the whistle if anything is amiss. May I suggest intermediate property inspections by the landlord or agent, of course, while respecting the tenant’s privacy and time. This is a common practice in places such as Australia. Tenancy contracts will have to evolve to reflect this.

I am pleased to note that penalties will be enhanced to deter vice syndicates who profit off their sex workers and those who bring in foreigners for sex work. With freelance sex workers on the rise, it would also be necessary to extend the new regulations to any person who serves as their intermediary, regardless whether the sex worker was procured to work as one.

However, penalties are still reactive measures. We should also examine the root of the issue. Have we noticed a rise in prostitution? Is this purely because of increased accessibility of online platforms or are there other reasons? What are the demographics of the people who use such services? Can we do anything to educate these people about illegal prostitution and the risks involved?

Sir, I support this Bill, and I believe the new amendments will help safeguard the peace of affected residents. In Chinese, please.

(In Mandarin) [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.]: This Bill proposes that if tenants conduct vice activities in the house, the landlord will also be held responsible. The Government and CEA will assist the landlords to check the tenant's background. However, even if the tenants have a clean record, they may still conduct vice activities in the premises afterwards. So, is it fair to hold the landlords responsible?

I think if something is not quite right in the house, the neighbours would be more likely to become aware of that. Therefore, for homeowners and property agents, having a communication channel with their neighbours and the managing agent can help deter vice activities more effectively.

The Bill will allow the Police to better deal with overseas vice websites targeting Singapore and syndicates that bring women to Singapore to become sex workers. Some chat apps, such as Telegram, have anonymous functions. Will this deter the Police in their investigation efforts?

Here, I would like to thank the Government for their increased efforts to fight vice activities, especially in residential areas. This will allow our residents to enjoy a peaceful environment once again. I support this Bill.

2.56 pm

Prof Fatimah Lateef (Marine Parade): Mr Speaker, I am starting with a narrative. Names and addresses have been anonymised to maintain confidentiality.

A lady with a young family living in a condominium came to see me at my Meet-the-People Session. Seven months prior to this, she had noticed suspicious activities going on at a unit across from hers. Both men and women were coming in at regular intervals throughout the afternoon, night and into the early hours of the morning. They were not the same people as you and I would expect if they were members of the same family living in that unit. They were different ethnicities, different ages and some, as she described to me, would apparently seem to be under the influence of perhaps alcohol or drugs. She tried calling the authorities several times to assess. But each time, she would get responses such as and I quote, "The Police have more urgent crime to fight. We will come by later to check. And madam, we cannot arrest people unless you provide us with the hard evidence."

And thus, her family installed a CCTV camera to get that hard evidence. Indeed, she got it. The Police asked for photos, evidence and facts, and it was documented with very good timeline annotation. Different people, different ages, different ethnic groups coming into that unit. The pictures were very telling, very hard evidence, even better than the chat logs than was mentioned earlier. Different faces, different people coming in individually or in twos or threes at approximately two to three hourly intervals.

She then again approached the authorities. But then it was taking so long and in view of this, she came to see me. That was some half a year after all these had surfaced. Neither her managing agent nor her MCST (Management Corporation Strata Title) could assist her. Now for fear of her family's safety, she finally decided to come forward. After all, the definition of "vice" by the Merriam-Webster dictionary is really "immoral or evil habit, a sinful or a criminal practice".

This mother, with young children, living in a residential area, had genuine concerns. I assisted her to sort out her issues, of course, and it is now settled. But the point I am trying to make, Sir, is that: does it have to be so challenging for one young family and a concerned mom to activate the authorities for issues like this. We want to enhance this Bill. We are doing an amendment. We want to enhance the penalties. We want to enhance the fines. We want to make it a stern point and a deterrence. But can the frontline agencies and officers not be more sympathetic, more understanding, more aligned and more collaborative in their responses in handling of such issues from the community and the public?

That unit in the narrative I shared amounted to being used as a brothel, aligning with all of its definitions in section 2 of this Bill, including the example on "circumstantial evidence".

The use of apartment units for vice is very challenging. The authorities alone cannot detect every breach and thus, I am calling for greater recognition and collaboration with the community partners and residents living in specific areas. They can provide the ears and eyes you so need. This is the best model to have for us to work to deprive the operating spaces in the heartlands and in the residential areas causing all the disamenities.

We have the policies, we have the framework, we have the guidelines, but there may be gaps in execution of these. Thus, good ground feedback is necessary and useful, and can be very, very powerful indeed to ensure that we can execute these policies effectively.

My further input on the Bill. Education alone will not get the results we desire. Those involved are too entrenched, the education target may work perhaps for younger people who are considering venturing into this. You may try to stop them using deterrent publicity, heighten awareness and education combined, but it has to be more persistent and more consistent. Otherwise, we will not get the results that we started off to get.

On the vice rates, for it to have impact, do more and make it regular, sustainable and consistent, for it to have the effect and the results that it is intended. Otherwise, it will be a cat and mouse game, you leave and they will come out and play.

Enforcement, as shared in this Bill too, has to have consistency, or else, it will lose the impact that is intended.

Now, the review of HDB and residential premises need even more surveillance, monitoring and proactive measures. You cannot imagine how challenging it is on the ground when feedback is given and it results in a cursory, standardised reply from the agencies or HDB. These gaps need to be addressed and requires absolute strengthening, can something more substantial be worked out with the Council of Estate Agents – as you are having a dialogue with them – HDB and indeed, we are looking forward perhaps even to have Members of the Parliament being engaged in your focus group discussions because we may have issues that may need to be addressed in some of these review.

There is a stark link between sex, prostitution, sex drugs, sex enhancing drugs, drug utilisation and sales, love scams, online vice and even cigarette cartel. The authorities may need to look at these more wholesomely and this whole interdependent cycle and ring we need to break.

In the heartlands, coffeeshops are one culprit area for these activities. We have noticed blatant breaches and overt activities related to vice at these coffeeshops seems to be on-going in broad daylight. This cannot be. What else can one conjecture when dubious characters or so called pimps, sit at the corner table of a coffeeshop the whole afternoon, into the night and the early hours of the morning and even after the coffeeshop closes. The same person with the same shirt, with the same characters around them. They make negotiation for girls and many other things. And it is very very blatant and obvious to the lay person. Is it not so obvious to the authorities? These coffeshops have got staircases leading to the upper units and these extremely conducive places for prostitution or even to be used as an illegal brothel. Transactions can even be done more overtly. Therefore, responses from the authorities such as "It is a public place and anyone can really sit there" are really not helping the situation.

For online vice, it is even more challenging. We are very connected as a society given the number of devices each person possesses. Vice syndicates leverage technology to expand and flourish their operations, crossing borders even. What is MHA's strategy for tackling this efficiently and effectively? How are we able to work with overseas agencies and countries on this?

In all, Sir, I support the enhanced penalties and the amendment Bill must execute what it is intended to do to maintain the morality, the rights and the status of women. I hope to see the enhanced collaborative efforts clean up our heartlands and beyond.

3.04 pm

Mr Alex Yam (Marsiling-Yew Tee): Mr Speaker, I support the amendments to the Women's Charter to better deal with the issue of prostitution in Singapore. Let me begin with regard to amendment to section 2 of the Charter, I welcome the changes to the definition of "brothel" to include has been expressly or implicitly advertised or represented as being used for the purposes of prostitution.

A cursory scan of some of our tabloids shows advertising for somewhat dubious outlets peddling health services and therapies. It does not take much to know that many health clubs and so-called massage parlours are but false fronts for vice activities. We see it in various parts of our island, especially in the heartlands. Darkened windows, heavy curtains, signages, instructions to go via the back entrance and somewhat under-dressed foreign ladies beckoning only to men to come in to relax.

They are not hidden away in some private corner of our island or back some alley-way. They exist right under the noses of authorities. Some of our older malls like Chinatown and else where have become centres of vice activities. To give an example, the basement of Katong Shopping Centre is a case in point – better known for chicken rice, banana pies and tailors – but also a warren of small stalls with ladies in heavy make-up cooing away at passers-by, with no regard for the sensitivities of those with younger children. Some leave little to the imagination of the services that they prefer to provide, besides the purported advertising of physical therapy or facials. These outlets are not new either. These have proliferated through the years. It is about time we take firmer action to weed them out from the heartlands and return decency to our living environments.

It is not just about commercial spaces, in the last few years, I have also received feedback on vice activities occurring in our estates – both private and public housing. I wish to ask the Ministry to work closely with MND to advise MCSTs as well as how to work with HDB to ensure that vice activities do not end up right at the door steps of families as pointed out by the two previous hon Members, sometimes, it is difficult, even for the MCSTs and Managing Agents to decide how to deal with feedback and complaints of such matters.

To give one specific example, a private condo in my constituency. Residents long suspected that one unit in the block was involved in illegal vice activities. However, there were very little levers available to them to try to obtain evidence despite reports to the police. It took some time before the issue was resolved. Some of the same frustration that the hon Member, Prof Fatimah Lateef's residents have gone through, are the same experiences, perhaps elsewhere in Singapore.

How does the Ministry then plan to identify and better prevent such premises from being used for prostitution. Many, as I had previously mentioned, operate with almost brazen impunity. How many does the Ministry estimate are currently operating and how will the enforcement be done? While the amendments to section 148(4) which places the burden of proof upon owners or agents of owners to prove that they could not ascertained that the place is used as a brothel, how will the Ministry prevent loopholes that may well allow the masterminds behind such enterprises to escape the arm of the law.

I will now touch upon section 146A. Mr Speaker, a simple search online will reveal the plethora of websites peddling vice. It does not take much effort to search for such advertising. The third incarnation of a well-known website from Hong Kong currently lists 399 women providing vice activities in Singapore. It is a sophisticated online advertising platform that was first founded in 2002, the site lists everything from detailed services, districts, statistics, even so called "field reports" from customers. When the Hong Kong police conducted a three-day raid on the vice ring in 2013, an estimated US$15 million in cash was seized.

That alone should give us pause for thought on the value of this horrendous industry. Back then, the Hong Kong Police declared a strategic victory over this biggest online vice site. Yet it has not gone away. Its servers are now based in the US and it has expanded its operations to advertise in 40 other countries besides Hong Kong, from Japan to even Bangladesh. Their Hong Kong operations alone, currently list 1,522 profiles across the Island, Peninsula and New Territories.

In this game of cat and mouse, it is the mouse that can squirrel away easily and proliferate in various ways and forms. I therefore wish to ask how effective does the Ministry think that the proposed amendments will be in rooting out the rats and clamping down on such nefarious forms of advertising.

This is because while section 146A(1) will raise the penalties, the experience of Hong Kong seem to indicate that the penalties in themselves are not sufficient deterrence against those who seek to gain from exploiting women. The global hosting of websites as well as the dark web has proven to make law enforcement more complex than before.

I wish to also ask the Ministry to clarify the penalties as amended in the Women's Charter, how do they compare to penalties in other related laws, such as in the Prevention of Human Trafficking Act. I urge that where stronger deterrents are found in our other laws that the Charter be further strengthened to match those and if the Charter provides for stronger penalties, then other related Acts be amended as well.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I was involved for a number of years in street missions in the region. At this point, I wish to share three stories from interviews over the years that have left me with much sorrow.

The first is a girl named Pearl. Pearl is fair and of slight built, with almond shaped eyes, she has masqueraded as a Japanese girl in Taipei. She says she taught herself Japanese and watched YouTube to learn Japanese mannerisms and in her words "how to be more Kawaii". She said that in doing so, she can be a premium girl, fetching three times the price per customer than if she advertised herself as Chinese. She is what is referred to in the industry as an outcall girl, clients will call up her agent after reviewing her profile on Line or WeChat and fix a time and location which she will go to. She has been to Taiwan a few times and to Australia too. Each trip last two weeks and each time she makes US$3,000 to US$4,000, a princely sum back home. When I asked her why she does it, she grins and says it is a quick way to make money at her age and she earns much much more than her peers. Yet despite that smile, she has no joy in her eyes.

The second girl is Rainbow, she hails from Thailand. I met her at a shelter. She was a regular Honey Girl in Hong Kong until she met an agent that abused her and other girls. She used to make trips out to Hong Kong and as a Honey Girl will be booked into hotels in tourist districts and wait for calls to service men who will look her up via online adverts and make appointments through agents. She could never leave her hotel room during that time, eating just instant noodles and smoking cigarettes between customers. She claims that she saved the money she had for her parents back in the village and to pay for her younger brother's education. She claimed to be doing sales overseas to her family. The money she had left over she undertook plastic surgery to become more attractive.

Thinking she would benefit from a more aggressive agent who could bring in more well-paying clientele, she changed her pimp and was sent to a neighbouring resort island on the pretext of being an escort. Instead, she found herself enslaved and locked up, servicing clients who roughed her up and her own agent who raped and beat her repeatedly over the course of three months. Terrified and psychologically scarred, she has since been rescued, found it difficult to return to a normal life and also to return to her family. She fears for her life. She was all of 19 when she was freed. When I met her, she would finch at every sound, her eyes frenzied, darting back and forth as if frightened of shadows and of doors opening. Here was a girl, who might have had a future, someone's daughter, someone's sister, used, abused, left as an empty worn out shell, her future cruelly torn from her.

There are also many examples that I shared in 2014, when we debated the passing of the Prevention of Human Trafficking Bill. But the story of Mya bears repeating. I met Mya, a 21-year old girl from Mong La, Myanmar, in 2009. Despite her youth, she had at that time, the weight of the world on her and looked as if she was in her 40s. She was born blind, she was sold by her aunt to traffickers at the age of four. Hers is a heart-wrenching story of suffering. Held captive in a brothel far away in a neighbouring country, she serviced up to 15 clients a day. She was rescued at the age of 16 – remember this, she was sold at the age of four – but her instinct then was to try to run back to her brothel and captors because it was the only reality, the only "home" that she knew. By then, she had AIDS and passed away two months after I interviewed her.

Mr Speaker, this is not a life. This is a trade that we cannot and should never romanticise or glamourise. This is a cruel soulless industry. A developed nation like ours that takes pride in the progress that our women and the progress that they have made and honours our mothers, sisters and wives, cannot possibly be proud to have men treat women and their bodies as mere commodities for carnal gratification.

Mr Speaker, my wife and I and our three boys are expecting a daughter and a sister soon. Many of us in this House have daughters, too. Can we imagine a world where women are allowed to be exploited and abused as the same one that we hope our own daughters and sisters will grow up, thrive and succeed in? How will we lift our heads in the future and say to them that we stood by and closed one eye to what is nothing more than the commercialised rape of women? That this safe and secure society that we take pride in – one that educates our girls, raises them up as a generation of leaders to hopefully change the world for the better and, yet, still allow dens of subjugation to exist amongst us.

Yes, that is what the Charter is meant to do. But those who are in this so-called oldest of "professions", whether in Singapore or elsewhere, are but a reflection of inequality and servitude that plagues our world.

Mr Speaker, I was hoping that, today, we will not just be making amendments to stiffen penalties against vice. I would very much like to ask that the Charter be amended to abolish prostitution from Singapore. This is an abhorrent activity and it is never a necessary evil. It is nothing but a stain upon the hard-earned rights of our Singapore women. I support the Bill's intent to strengthen the authorities’ hand in clamping down but I urge for greater bravery and gumption in eradicating the exploitation of women from our shores. It is not about management but about eradication, hopefully, soon.

Mr Speaker, we have a duty and a responsibility to our daughters and our sisters that a world free from exploitation is possible, if only we dare to take that step forward. Mr Speaker, notwithstanding my concerns, I support this Bill and its intent to control vice in Singapore.

3.17 pm

Ms Anthea Ong (Nominated Member): Mr Speaker, I commend the Ministry for acknowledging the exploitation that women face in the sex industry with this Bill and stand in support of the Bill that introduces significantly enhanced punishments for persons who exploit women and girls, including those under 16 years old and/or with mental health conditions, for sex.

Sir, as much as I appreciate that we are protecting our vulnerable groups, I have to, once again, highlight the inappropriate description used. It was just last month when I brought to the attention of this House in the Second Reading of the Income Tax Act that we still use archaic and deeply derogatory terms like "lunatic", "idiot" or "insane" to describe our differently-abled Singaporeans in our legislature. And here we are, in section 144 of the Women's Charter and clause 7 of the amendments, we now call them "mentally defective"! Mr Speaker, unless our official narrative of a caring and inclusive Singapore is to still view our differently-abled Singaporeans in such derogatory terms and as lesser human beings, which I am sure it is not, then I urge all Government Ministries to ensure that all amendments to our laws brought to this House for readings must also be an opportunity to update all derogatory references to our vulnerable groups, even if the intent to protect them is well-meaning. I was not clear in my ask of the Minister for Finance with the Income Tax Bill but I would like to be direct with my clarification with the Minister on this Bill. Can the Minister please assure us that the term "mentally defective" will be replaced with a more appropriate and dignified description that does not perpetuate this persistent need to label them as inferior human beings?

Now, back to the amendments to this Bill, Mr Speaker, notwithstanding my support for the Bill, I have two key clarifications to seek from the Minister.

First, will increasing the present penalty of $10,000 to $100,000 be enough to deter the offenders?

Second, given that the Ministry acknowledges the exploitation that happens in the sex industry with these amendments, would it be more efficient and effective for us to also engage sex workers as part of the solution by encouraging and protecting them to come forward to report on these offenders?

Sir, let me elaborate on my first clarification on the inadequacy of merely enhancing punishments and the impunity of exploitative agents.

A recent report recounts a man who facilitated Thai sex workers into Singapore and required the women to submit all their income for the first 20 customers. I also learnt about other examples of exploitation by agents from Project X, an NGO that was started 11 years ago by a social worker who saw how sex workers are amongst the most marginalised in our society and needed support; and The T Project, Singapore's first and only shelter for homeless transgender women, some of whom are also sex workers.

Let me share the real story of a mother of a two-year-old boy in her early 30s to illustrate how, even with the enhanced penalties, exploitative agents may still get away scot-free. I will just call her Jasmine.

Jasmine came to Singapore to work on a six-month visa that allows her to do "free work" at the behest of her friend. "Free work" was the agent's way of expertly insinuating that she could do sex work anywhere in Singapore, even though the visa she had was to work as a performing artiste in a bar. She was told it would cost her $15,000 in total which she must pay over the course of six months. Three months later, Jasmine was arrested on the street. At this point, she had already paid $6,900 to her agent.

Desperate, Jasmine went to Project X who helped her lodge reports with both the Police and MOM. The agent and the employer have ostensibly violated the Women's Charter Article 142 on "importation of woman or girl by false pretences" as well as Article 146 on "persons living on or trading in prostitution". Unfortunately, after multiple trips to the Police station, ICA and MOM, Jasmine was deported three weeks later on having committed the offence of not working at her designated workplace. Meanwhile, the agent was still actively recruiting women based on the WhatsApp posts that Jasmine shared with Project X after she left Singapore.

In yet another case, a single mother with a seven-year-old son in her late 20s was arrested after a tip-off. I will call her Rose. Rose assisted the Police in every way possible. However, the agent whom she never met in person, had covered up his tracks on WhatsApp with fake and inactive numbers. The investigation took three months, Rose had her passport taken away and given a Special Pass for the duration. Yet, the agent was not caught.

Project X alone supports about an average of eight of such exploitation cases every year for the last three years and none of these cases so far saw the agents nabbed. So, it begs the question: if simply raising penalties will be adequate in curbing such abuse, especially for agents who know how to circumvent the law, who have intimate knowledge of the women's families and who leverage technology to conceal their identities.

Could the Minister please share with the House what is the number of pimps and vice-abetters prosecuted in the last three years versus the number of sex workers arrested? Is increasing the present penalty of $10,000 to $100,000 sufficient in deterring these offences?

The National Institute of Justice, the research agency of the US Department of Justice, released a 2016 report that pointed out that the "certainty of being caught is a vastly more powerful deterrent than the punishment". They make a clear distinction between incapacitation and deterrence. Their evidence, which encompasses a large body of research on crime deterrence, suggests that higher penalties neither chasten already convicted criminals nor have the biggest effect on deterring potential crimes. Rather, certainty, or "the likelihood of being caught and punished", is the major deterrent.

This means that, in addition to raising penalties, we must also increase our precision in targeting and apprehending exploitative agents. To increase precision in targeting agents, the most intuitive and economic way is to enlist their victims. This makes the women under exploitative agents our most powerful ally.

Mr Speaker, this brings me to my second clarification. The majority of women who go to Project X for support after exploitation refused to make a Police report because they fear that they will face punishment, deportation and blacklisting. When our most efficient and effective access to exploitative agents is through the women they have abused, will the Minister work with the sex workers by concretising victim support as part of the solution?

Conditional immunity for sex workers specifically has been adopted in the American states of California and Utah. California's SB-233, which was passed just this year, echoes many concerns that we have in Singapore. According to the official Senate floor analysis of SB-233, sex workers are victims of violent crime at a disproportionately high rate. Because they fear criminal charges and mistreatment with the police, they rarely report crimes done to them. The analysis further offers that the Bill "simply prioritises...health and safety of people engaged in sex work, including human trafficking victims, over their criminalisation...for misdemeanor ...when this population comes forward as victims or witnesses of specified violent crimes."

Mr Speaker, I urge the Minister to consider offering these victimised women conditional immunity from charges like soliciting and conditional protection from blacklisting to join us in our fight against exploitative agents, similar in principle to the certificate of cooperation given to drug traffickers. This will not just increase the number of whistleblowers but also reinforce the Bill's intent to protect vulnerable women and bring the offenders to justice.

Criminal compensation will further improve our precision in targeting exploitation. Women who enter into arrangements with unlicensed agents are almost always in a very low socio-economic position and, therefore, desperate for work opportunities to survive and support their families. If we send them away with debt, we are implicitly pushing them to re-enter into risky business arrangements and fall prey to other dangerous agents. I seek the Minister's clarification if we could consider working closely with the Court to arrange for criminal compensation for the exploited women. The Court is obliged to actively consider whether or not to order compensation under section 359 of the Criminal Procedure Code. I believe that the prosecution and investigation officer can invest greater effort in helping the victims understand their rights, produce evidence to guide compensation liabilities and collaborate with the Court to ensure the agents make these payments. This would increase the incentive for abused women to report their agents while also effectively protecting the interest of already-exploited victims.

Mr Speaker, my recommendations may make some wonder if protecting sex workers and recognising them as victims may merely encourage more women to join the sex industry. However, experts have demonstrated that a framework that recognises the safety and welfare of sex workers elevates the safety of all women and makes it easier for those who have been exploited to leave the sex industry. The alternative, however, is that exploitative agents and sexual predators continue to act with impunity and so more women are preyed on to join the industry. We need to see sex workers as part of the solution, including our transgender sex workers who are also sometimes victims to exploitative and abusive agents.

We still have a biased cultural attitude towards the sex industry, one that legitimises men’s persistent demand for sexual services but villianises the women who supply these services.

The Association of Women for Action and Research (AWARE), Singapore’s leading gender equality advocacy group notes that upholding women’s autonomy and agency, including that of sex workers, is crucial to respecting, protecting and fulfilling our commitment to gender equality as defined by UN Convention on Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW). To this end, the CEDAW Committee has recognised sex workers as a group of women who are disproportionately affected by gendered violence, discrimination and marginalisation. CEDAW's approach to gender equality should inform any policy to protect sex workers from exploitation. We must involve and empower sex workers as equal partners and experts in determining the solutions that work for them.

The physical, emotional and sexual violence that are systematically perpetrated against sex workers undermine gender equality. Studies have found that sexual violence is likely to occur more commonly in cultures that foster beliefs of perceived male superiority and social and cultural inferiority of women. At a time when a group like SG Nasi Lemak exists, when peeping tom upskirting cases are on a steady rise, it is paramount that we treat all forms of gender-based violence with urgency and gravity. We should, therefore, be hyper-vigilant of the normalising effects of impunity for exploitative agents and employers and do all we can to prevent the disenfranchisement of sex workers.

I befriended a sex worker almost 15 years ago. Let us call her Lily. She shared with me that it was the sheer desperation of poverty back home that drove her to be a sex worker here so as to feed her son and two ailing parents back home. Lily eventually left the sex trade after having saved enough to take courses. She is now a world-travelling and well-respected professional in the hair and beauty trade. Sex workers may be looked down upon, but it is clear that many of them have much to contribute to society and also, like us, dream for a better life.

Not being heard as a sex worker is no reason for silence when it comes to being exploited. When we offer protection and give them a voice to be part of the solution to the problems of abuse and oppression that we are trying to solve in the sex industry, Mr Speaker, I am sure they will come forward to say, #MeToo.

Mr Speaker: Order. I propose to take a break now. I will resume the Sitting at 3.55 pm.

Sitting accordingly suspended

at 3.35 pm until 3.55 pm.

Sitting resumed at 3.55 pm

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

Women's Charter (Amendment) Bill

Debate resumed.

Mr Darryl David (Ang Mo Kio): Mr Speaker, Sir, Singapore has generally taken a pragmatic approach to vice-related activities. Prostitution per se is not a crime in Singapore. The Government's approach has been to restrict prostitution to licensed brothels by outlawing activities like solicitation and pimping that are largely linked to unlicensed prostitution.

This model has generally worked in the past to limit such vice-related activities to certain areas of Singapore where licensed brothels operate.

This approach, however, is less likely to work in today's context where commercial sex can be procured easily online via Internet and social media platforms. Operators of online commercial sex platforms have increasingly offered sexual services out of residential units, such as private apartments, condominiums and even from HDB flats in the heartlands.

According to a news article published in The Straits Times in 2017, operators of these unlicensed brothels are attracted by the low rent of these residential units, as well as the discreet locations that these residential units have. A follow-up Straits Times article in May 2019 reported how more than 150 women and a man were arrested in May for vice-related activities that were operating out of residential units, some of which were in the heartlands.

Operating out of an unlicensed brothel compromises the safety and security of an environment in which young children and families live and I am heartened to know that the amendments in this Bill comprise active measures to ensure that landlords are now legally obliged to not turn a blind eye to such activities.

The amendments in clause 12 for section 148 has now clarified that landlords and/or their appointed agents need to perform reasonable diligence when leasing premises out to tenants. I am supportive of this amendment and its enhanced penalties as they would help to restrict the use of residential units as unlicensed brothels by putting the onus on property owners and their appointed agents to not turn a blind eye to illicit vice activities conducted on their premises.

At the same time, I am encouraged that the amendments also offer protection to owners and agents who have done their due diligence and are genuinely unaware of the happenings in their units. In short, those who have done their due diligence should not be unjustly punished.

The amendments in clause 10 for section 146A have given the authorities greater power to prosecute and undertake enforcement actions against overseas operators of vice services who use remote communications channels to facilitate the provision of commercial sexual services in Singapore.

Given that such services can be managed and organised by overseas vice syndicates, there are, indeed, merits in extending the enforcement power of the authorities beyond our shores. Yet, the challenge lies in actually being able to enforce the law. How would the authorities carry out cross-border enforcement actions against overseas-based vice-related operations, especially in contexts where Singapore does not have repatriation or reciprocal arrangements with the countries where the syndicates are operating out of? I hope the Government would shed some light on this area.

The amendments to clauses 3, 4 and 5 that increase the penalty of offence in trafficking women and girls and to import them under the false pretence with the intent that they be employed or used for the purpose of prostitution either within or outside Singapore will certainly serve as strong deterrence to would-be offenders.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I am supportive of these amendments as they come down strong on those who prey on vulnerable women and girls. While the law punishes the offenders, I believe more can be done to support unwitting victims who have been deceived by these vice syndicates.

Many of these women and girls were lured to come to Singapore by false promises of legitimate employment but only to be coerced and trapped into sex work. Many of them were desperate to leave the trade but were coerced to stay in the trade with threats. While the Government's position is not to prosecute potential victims of trafficking, I hear that we need to put in place a better support system to rescue these women from vice syndicates.

Can the Government and authorities work with local NGOs to put in support systems for these victims before we repatriate them? Can the Government also work with the respective agencies in the victims' home countries to ensure that their welfare is addressed before we send them back, as they might have to face possible recrimination from the vice syndicates in their home country?

Mr Speaker, I believe that all the Members in the Chamber here today would agree on what I feel are the two key points of this Bill. Firstly, that the places where young children and families live should be kept safe and secure from any vice-related activities and, secondly, that sex trafficking of women, especially girls, against their will is a heinous offence and that such traffickers should face the full force of the law. It is with these two aspects that I conclude my speech in firm support of the Bill.

3.58 pm

Mr Gan Thiam Poh (Ang Mo Kio): Mr Speaker, Sir, thanks for allowing me to participate in this debate. I have three main points of concern.

Firstly, regarding online vice. I commend the Ministry's efforts to deal with this problem through the introduction of extra-territorial jurisdiction to the Charter. Doing so will equip our Police force more adequately as criminals are exploiting technology to boost their revenue and protect themselves by operating their illegal businesses remotely.

I would like to ask if it is possible to require the social media providers to monitor their websites round-the-clock for such vice transactions and either remove or report attempts to offer online services, both locally and from overseas, to potential customers in Singapore. What measures will the Ministry implement to enlist the cooperation of social media providers to help deter such offers and bring those involved to task?

Secondly, the irresponsible lease of premises. Certainly, owners and tenants who allow such activities to be conducted on their premises should be severely punished. The law requires owners to perform due diligence when leasing out their properties, such as but not limited to, conducting identity checks when signing the lease agreements. However, the tenants who had been cleared under such checks could still use the residences to conduct illegal activities without the owner's knowledge. What other mitigations are there for the unfortunate, innocent owners?

Lastly, the problem of "visitor-vice". These are prostitutes who enter Singapore as tourists or on visit passes. Some individuals operate on their own while others are flown in and controlled by crime syndicates overseas or even locally. How can we prevent these syndicates from engaging in such activities in our homeland? Most importantly, we need to protect those who are abused and trafficked here for such exploitation. Do we have a framework to enable victim-prostitutes to seek assistance and also act as witnesses? I would like to conclude with my full support for this Bill.

4.01 pm

Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang (Nee Soon): Sir, let me start by saying that I stand in support of the Bill. I do not doubt that there is a need to curb vice activities perpetuated through online platforms and I agree that this is a serious concern that must be addressed.

I also support MHA’s intent to deprive vice syndicates of operating space, especially in the heartlands. My residents and myself included all want a sense of safety and security where we live.

But while I support these amendments, I have concerns about their effectiveness. Are we addressing only the symptoms of the issue and not the root cause? Are we just chasing our tails? Is it time to rethink our strategy?

My first concern is about the amendment targeting the irresponsible lease of premises and whether it is feasible and practical. Sir, as I mentioned, I support the intent of the amendment. None of us wants our neighbourhoods to become hubs of vice activities. But my question is: how are homeowners and tenants supposed to enforce this? MHA has stated that if vice activities are detected at their premises, homeowners and tenants will have to show that they had no knowledge of and could not, with "reasonable diligence", have known that the place would be used for vice activities.

One way of satisfying themselves is to conduct identity checks at the point of signing their lease agreements, as part of due diligence when renting out or sub-letting their premises. This sounds good on paper. In practice, however, how does a homeowner or tenant perform "reasonable diligence" other than asking directly whether one is a sex worker?

If the homeowner or tenant drops by and find that the tenant or sub-tenant is having sex with another person, how do they determine whether or not that is a vice activity? I hope that the Minister can provide clarity on how we will be enforcing this.

My second concern is about whether our attempts to clamp down on sexual services work. Sir, this would not be the first time I am making this point. Two years ago, I stood in this house to support the Massage Establishments Bill. But in that speech, I said, "Worse still, we might drive these activities further underground." This was the fear of former Home Affairs Minister, Mr Wong Kan Seng who said this in Parliament in 1999 in relation to a question about prostitution, "It is better that the Police know where these areas are and enforcement action can be taken, rather than to disperse these brothels to the whole of Singapore and we have a cat-and-mouse game chasing after them or, worse still, drive them underground, and they will be operating everywhere."

I fear that we are doing what Mr Wong advised us 20 years ago not to do and that the cat-and-mouse game has started. In 2010, Member of Parliament Mr Baey Yam Keng said that vice raids in Geylang led to pimps and prostitutes "spilling out" of the area.

Former Nominated Member of Parliament Kok Heng Leun raised the same concerns in his speech on the Massage Establishments Bill. He said, "In the past, there used to be these health centres where sexual services were provided alongside massage. Most of these health centres were not allowed to renew their licences. The shutdown of these health centres led to the proliferation of smaller parlours set up by the people who used to work at these health centres. From interviews with massage workers, the proliferation was also because smaller parlours were harder to apprehend for sexual services."

What is our end goal? As we wipe out one area, we only push the sex workers to another area which we then try to wipe out.

I appreciate that vice activities will always evolve, and enforcement needs to evolve as well. However, it seems that the vice activities are evolving at least partly because of our actions. This cat-and-mouse game means that we are wasting our precious resources and most importantly, we are always one step behind.

Sir, I believe a long-term solution can come from speaking with sex workers themselves about the issue. I met up with Singaporeans sex workers when I was researching the Massage Establishment Bill and I met up with Singaporeans sex workers again when researching this Bill. I sat there listening to their stories, their fears and their aspirations. These are fellow Singaporeans and many are victims of circumstance. Many feel that they have no choice but to be sex workers. We need to ask ourselves how many people would willingly sell sexual services?

I listened to one woman share about how she got kicked out of her house by her parents when she was young, became homeless, did not know where to go for help and ultimately entered the sex trade just to survive. She was beaming with pride when she informed everyone during the dialogue that she had just paid the deposit for a make-up course and everyone in the room cheered.

I listened to how another woman became a sex worker when she was only 19 years old and has been doing this for four years now. Her parents divorced when she was five years old and both parents did not want her. She was left with her grandmother who raised her. For her entire childhood, she was constantly reminded that she had no parents. I cannot imagine the impact that had on a young child.

She did not do well in her studies and could not get into a polytechnic. She tried to enrol in a private polytechnic but did not have enough money to pay the tuition fees. She then tried to get a bank loan but failed as she could not find a guarantor. Not knowing where else to go for help, she ultimately entered the sex trade for money to fund her education.

We can all take the moral high ground and tell the sex workers that they know the risk of sex work and that they can find another job, so why should we protect them and help them? But I hope we remember that these are fellow Singaporeans. Rather than judge them for their actions, I hope we can help them.

Sir, many of them also shared their fears with me and shared stories of how some sex workers get raped and robbed.

The Women’s Charter is all about protecting women and girls from exploitation and harm and this should include sex workers as well. The recent case where three youths hatched a plot to rob sex workers at knife-point highlights how sex workers are especially vulnerable. The trio agreed this plot as this would be the "safest" way to commit a crime as they would be preying on the sex workers’ "vulnerabilities and insecurities", given the illicit nature of their work.

The sex workers I spoke to feared that when they report a crime committed against them, they too will be arrested because of the illicit nature of their work. As such, many do not report the crime and my concerns are not just for the sex workers but also for society at large.

We have people committing crimes and getting away with it. They might continue with their crimes and start targeting others or, worse still, evolve to committing more serious crimes. Do we really want a rapist to get away scot-free just because his victim is a sex worker? Does our society become a safer place for all if this continues?

I can understand that what I am proposing is not a simple suggestion. However, can I ask if MHA is studying this problem and also studying what others are doing? I understand that in the US states of California, Utah and Washington, laws have been passed to allow sex workers to, without fear of arrest or prosecution, report crimes that they were victims of or witnesses to. Can MHA look into this holistically to assess the pros and cons of such laws and see what effects they have had on society?

Sir, I believe the long-term solution is to put more resources into helping sex workers transit out of their industry.

Indeed, many of the sex workers I spoke to said they wanted to leave the sex industry but needed help doing so.

Studies have showed that women who want to leave the sex work industry are trapped in their industry due to two key factors: one, society's prejudice against former sex workers; and two, the women’s lack of social support and low self-esteem.

The fortunate thing in Singapore is that in Singapore, we do have non-profit groups helping these women. Project X is one such group. It provides social, emotional, and legal support for sex workers in Singapore, and it hopes to launch The Next Step Programme, to which I hope the Government can provide some funding and support.

The programme aims to help sex workers who wish to leave the industry. Over six months, case workers work with the women to devise a customised plan. The plan aims to help the women in five important ways: financial planning, individual counselling, job skills training, family counselling, and social and communication skills. At the end of the six months, the women will have the option of continuing or exiting the programme.

Research shows that sex workers who have successfully left and abstained from sex work for at least two years have been able to do so only after about six attempts on average. It is not an easy transition, but the result, I believe, is worth the effort.

In 2017, Minister Josephine Teo said in relation to sex workers, "For those who wish to transit to other types of work, I appreciate it really may not be easy for them, but help is available and we are most willing to reach out to them". Sir, I hope that MHA will consider providing support and funding for The Next Step Programme.

Sir, let me end with what Mr Wong Kan Seng said in this House 20 years ago again, "Governments around the world and through the ages have tried to eradicate prostitution, but none had succeeded. Criminalising prostitution only drives such activities underground, resulting in crime syndicates taking control over such activities."

There is a need for us to rethink and relook our policies and remember what our former Minister told us.

I hope that rather than just prosecute sex workers, we can provide help. Rather than entrap them with our undercover officers, we can engage them holistically. Rather than lecture them on morals and the law, we can listen to them and understand why they became a sex worker what their concerns are and what their aspirations are.

I hope that MHA will consider holding discussions with the sex workers directly. I would be keen to help with this and facilitate it. Some sex workers may be concerned about meeting with MHA for fear of being identified, but we can start by meeting with sex workers who are transiting out of the industry.

Let us work together with them to find long-term solutions rather than against them. Sir, we can take the moral high ground and judge them, discriminate against them and even despise them. But let us remember that they are also someone’s child, someone's daughter, someone's loved one and more than anything, these are fellow Singaporeans who need help. Let us help them.

And by helping them transit out of the sex industry, we might actually reduce the number of Singaporean sex workers much faster than arresting them and playing this cat-and-mouse game.

4.11 pm

Mr Yee Chia Hsing (Chua Chu Kang): Mr Speaker, in Mandarin, please.

(In Mandarin) [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.]: Mr Speaker, Sir, I welcome the proposed amendments to the Women’s Charter to increase the responsibilities for landlords. Over the past few years, illegal vice activities have been popping-up in HDB precincts, causing disamenities in the neighbourhoods. The landlords have a duty to verify the identities of potential tenants, their background and the purpose of renting.

Mr Speaker, Sir, although I support the amendments to the Women’s Charter, I have some concerns that many HDB flat owners are elderly residents, who leased out their whole flat to stay with their children to have another source of income. Some of these elderly residents may not be well educated and may not know what their legal obligations are as a landlord. As such, I have three questions for MHA.

First, will the landlords be held responsible if the original tenant subsequently allows others to stay in the premises without their knowledge?

Second, can the HDB flat owners rely on the advice of the property agents? Would they be deemed to have done their duty as long as they carry out the checks as advised by the property agents?

Third, for elderly residents who may have mobility issues, can they rely on the property agents to carry out the necessary checks?

Mr Speaker, Sir, while it is important that flat owners do the necessary checks before leasing out their premises, we have to be mindful that many elderly flat owners may not be well educated or may have mobility issues. As such, I hope the MHA can give clarifications on my questions.

4.13 pm

Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye (Tanjong Pagar): Mr Speaker, I stand in support of the Bill, which seeks to strengthen the laws against online vice activities and to enhance the Police’s levers against vice syndicates. However, I do have a few questions and suggestions for the Senior Parliamentary Secretary.

The proposed amendments to the Women’s Charter are timely as the sex trade in Singapore has been evolving in tandem with new technologies. As a former Police commander, I have seen first-hand how illegal vice activities have moved from brothels masquerading under the guise of massage parlours, to online messaging applications like WeChat which utilises geo-targeting technologies to allow anyone to find sex workers in their vicinity.

The confluence of the popularity of such messaging platforms and the rise in short-term rentals, perpetuated by platforms like AirBnB, will increase the difficulty of enforcement against vice syndicates. Through short-term rental platforms, syndicates now have easy access to a large inventory of locations that they can hop around to offer prostitution services. As of last week, a simple search of such services on an infamous online forum easily yielded over 1,800 listings that offer massage and sexual services, mostly by foreign nationals here on social visit visas, in various "discreet apartments" across Singapore. My suspicion is that many are operating out of apartments rented on a short-term basis, to avoid detection.

Therefore, while I am supportive of the proposed amendments to tackle irresponsible leasing of premises for vice activities, this only deals with homeowners who legally rent out their premises. How will our police officers enforce against the syndicates that tap on illegal short-term rental platforms to offer vice activities?

Messaging platforms are also introducing new technologies that will make it harder for our anti-vice officers to catch vice syndicates. The recent furore over the SG Nasi Lemak chat group has exposed the use of Telegram as an encrypted messaging platform, used to disseminate both obscene and pornographic content, including the offer of sexual services. Telegram also has a "self-destruct" feature, which users can set their messages, photos and files to be deleted on both the sender and the recipients’ devices. With the constant evolution of such digital platforms, it is crucial that our enforcement officers be updated regularly on the latest technologies that are being used to circumvent the detection of vice syndicates in Singapore.

Mr Speaker, the vice syndicates facilitating sexual services in Singapore are often based overseas. I am therefore happy to see that the proposed amendments to the Women’s Charter has introduced extra-territorial jurisdiction to section 146A. While this plugs a legal gap by allowing the Police to take decisive action against any overseas person using remote communication services to facilitate the provision of sexual services in Singapore, I would like to ask how will this be feasibly enforced? To deter people from committing such offences, could the Senior Parliamentary Secretary provide a concrete example of when a person based overseas would be in breach of the new section 146A, and how would the Ministry act against such a person who is not physically in Singapore?

While we tackle the rise of vice activities perpetuated through new media, it is vital that we continue to take action against the business operations of unsavoury establishments that masquerade as public entertainment outlets in residential areas especially those with young children.

During my time with the Clementi Police Division, my officers regularly took enforcement actions against the massage parlours suspected to be offering illegal sex services in mixed-use developments such as Bukit Timah Shopping Centre. But despite our constant enforcement actions, seedy establishments continued to operate – many times out of the same shop unit – as syndicates were able to find locals to register themselves as new owners of the massage parlours and act as their fall-guy. In our colloquial terms, we term this as "finding a tua pek kong".

Now as a Member of Parliament, I receive regular complaints from residents about the seedy public entertainment and massage outlets located in mixed developments such as Orchard Towers. Members would agree with me that such seedy businesses should not be co-located in residential areas especially those with young children. How would the new definition of "brothel" and the amendments to section 148 tackle the "tua pek kong" phenomenon and eradicate such seedy public entertainment and massage outlets in mixed-use developments?

Can the Ministry also consider imposing a cap on the number of such outlets in a specified area, particularly in areas where there are many residences? This is a point that I have raised before here in Parliament. From my policing experience, I have often noticed that once an area has reached a certain threshold of such outlets, syndicates tend to gravitate towards the area as their next business opportunity, resulting in a quick surge of illegal vice activities.

Lastly, we must not forget about providing a safe reporting channel to the women who have been exploited and forced to work as sex workers. I read with concern about a report published by the US State Department earlier this year, which claimed that there were 16 trafficking cases in Singapore in 2018, of which 10 involved sex trafficking. I would like to ask the Senior Parliamentary Secretary if this indeed is accurate, and what are the measures provided to women who may be in such circumstances and would need a safe reporting channel.

Mr Speaker, the proposed measures under the Bill is a step in the right direction as it will provide the Police with the legal tools necessary to combat vice activities and vice syndicates operating through online media. However, while we pit our wits against these syndicates, it is vital that our anti-vice officers recognise the shift in such trends, which are abetted by new encrypted messaging technologies and short-term rental platforms. I also urge more enforcement action to be done to ensure that such seedy businesses are not co-located in mixed-use residential developments, where there are many young children residing. With that, I support the Bill.

Mr Speaker: Senior Parliamentary Secretary Sun Xueling.

4.21 pm

Ms Sun Xueling: Mr Speaker, I thank Members for their support for the Bill. I shall first address the broader questions on the Government’s policy on managing vice, before going into questions relating to specific amendments in the Bill.

First, regarding the Government's policy on vice and our vice management strategy.

Mr Louis Ng asked if these amendments will only drive vice elsewhere, further underground. Mr Alex Yam gave a passionate argument for the abolition of prostitution altogether in Singapore.

There are no easy answers to this. Mr Alex Yam shared that we should eradicate the exploitation of women, instead of management. He proposed abolishing prostitution. However, as Nominated Member Anthea Ong pointed out, the economic and social factors, such as poverty and a lack of realistic career options that push women into prostitution, will not go away by criminalising prostitution. She pointed out that sex workers and empowering these women can instead be part of the solution.

We studied the approaches adopted by various countries – some ban the purchase and selling of sex, others focus on criminalising demand and yet others have chosen to decriminalise or legalise the sex industry.

The experiences of these countries are mixed, but what Mr Wong Kan Seng said 20 years ago and which Mr Louis Ng quoted, still holds true: no country has successfully eradicated prostitution.

In Singapore, we take a pragmatic approach towards vice. We prioritise our efforts by: (a) ensuring organised crime groups and syndicates do not gain a foothold through vice activities; and (b) addressing public nuisance caused by vice-related activities, such as soliciting in public and vice in heartlands.

I acknowledge Mr Ng's concerns about syndicates which will continue to evolve alongside changes to our laws and our enforcement efforts. But we cannot do nothing either. Where that line is crossed, the Government must intervene to safeguard our neighbourhoods. This intervention is part of our larger vice management strategy, which Prof Fatimah Lateef, Mr Gan Thiam Poh, Mr Alex Yam and Er Dr Lee Bee Wah asked about.

Upstream, we target platforms which may be used to facilitate vice activities by: (a) taking down and blocking vice websites as and when they are detected; (b) establishing a regulatory regime for public entertainment and massage establishment outlets, which may be fronts for vice activities; and (c) detecting and deterring foreigners seeking to enter Singapore for sex work.

We also remind residents to be vigilant against vice activities by working with partners such as HDB and the Council for Estate Agencies (CEA) to promote awareness among residents and property agents; and raising deterrence against vice activities by publicising Police's enforcement efforts.

Downstream, the ICA and Police conduct raids on premises suspected of harbouring immigration offenders and vice activities; and the Police also conduct joint operations with their overseas counterparts, to target the upper echelons of these syndicates. I gave an example of such a joint operation with our counterparts in China, in my earlier speech.

Members also had questions about these downstream enforcement practices.

I appreciate the concerns faced by the resident in the example shared by Prof Fatimah Lateef. The Police do indeed hope to work with eyes and ears on the ground, be it vigilant property owners, tenants or property agents, to aid ongoing investigations or uncover unreported crime.

The Police may not appear to respond immediately to all information received, but this is also because they will have to verify the information before conducting any enforcement action.

But I assure Members that the Police value every piece of information provided by members of the public. The amendments today also demonstrate our commitment to weed out vice syndicates from residential areas. There are many channels available for the public to provide such information, including lodging a Police report or using iWitness.

The same goes for sex workers who are victims of crime. Ms Anthea Ong, through her examples, also made a broader point about a perception that syndicates are getting away scot-free, in spite of sex workers coming forward to assist with Police investigations.

The Police will follow up on information provided by sex workers, but as explained in my earlier speech, syndicates are finding ways to evade detection. This means that in some cases, the Police may find it challenging to identify the agents, or to establish the culpability of persons involved. And this is why we need these amendments in the Bill.

The Police update their enforcement strategies to remain effective. For example, they also conduct "precision" operations, to quote Ms Ong, targeted at the upper echelons of the syndicates.

So, there is a broad spectrum of enforcement operations conducted by the Police: regular, sustained enforcement raids targeting vices in the heartlands, and precise strikes to disrupt the syndicates.

Members of Parliament Mr Melvin Yong and Prof Fatimah Lateef asked about the vice situation at areas such as Orchard Towers and Geylang. The Police have adopted a targeted enforcement strategy at these locations. Broadly, they keep a high enforcement and operations tempo at these locations. Depending on the ground issues, the Police also work with other enforcement agencies and community stakeholders to detect and deter illegal activities.

I mentioned that we have in place a regulatory regime for massage establishments and public entertainment outlets, as part of our vice management strategy. It is outside of the scope of the amendments, but I will briefly talk about the principles.

The Police take into consideration URA's planning intent, the law and order situation of an area, and the operators’ background, before issuing licences to these operators. The operators have to comply with the licensing conditions, which include ensuring no immoral activity is carried out in the premises, and the Police conduct regular enforcement checks on the outlets. Errant operators may face regulatory sanctions, or even criminal penalties under the relevant legislation.

Ms Anthea Ong, Mr Alex Yam and Er Dr Lee Bee Wah asked for some vice-related statistics.

Between 2016 and 2018, about 8,800 foreign females were arrested for vice and immigration offences. In the same period, 328 vice abettors were arrested. The number of "pop-up brothels" in operation is difficult to estimate with certainty, but suffice to say that it is on an upward trend. We do not collect data on persons who purchase sexual services, as this is not an offence.

So far, I have set out our law enforcement strategies. I now turn to the issue of protection and support for sex workers, which Ms Anthea Ong, Mr Louis Ng, Mr Melvin Yong and Mr Darryl David spoke about.

We have tough laws against trafficking-in-persons, under the Prevention of Human Trafficking Act (PHTA).

There are safe reporting channels available to victims – persons can report to the Police or MOM via their hotlines and websites, or call 999 if immediate Police assistance is required. We also have in place a victim care framework, which includes providing assistance with temporary accommodation, food, counselling services, medical care and temporary employment.

Sex workers should not keep silent if they have been abused or exploited. Any sex worker who is a victim of crime should come forward and get Police's assistance. The Police will look into all allegations of criminal offences. Support is available for prosecution witnesses, such as assistance with housing and employment.

Mr Melvin Yong cited the report by the US State Department, regarding trafficking-in-persons. The report misrepresents the ground realities of the trafficking situation here. The MHA issued a clarification, published in the Straits Times, in July this year. Of the 16 alleged trafficking cases, 10 were alleged to be sex trafficking. Subsequent investigations by the Police ascertained that none of the 10 alleged sex trafficking cases were substantiated as trafficking under the PHTA. MHA has also clarified this with the US directly.

Ms Anthea Ong also asked about criminal compensation for sex workers who have been victims of crime. As Ms Ong has highlighted, there is already an existing legal framework under the Criminal Procedure Code.

Under the law, compensation is a matter for the Courts to consider. Where appropriate cases are brought to the attention of the Police by the victim, the Police will highlight to Attorney-General Chambers to consider making such a case on behalf of the victim.

Regarding conditional immunity for prosecution witnesses suggested by Ms Anthea Ong and Mr Louis Ng, this is an issue that needs further deliberation.

We will have to take into account, holistically, the circumstances and actions of the sex worker and prevailing laws and policies.

The Women's Charter is meant to protect women in general, including sex workers from being exploited by pimps. The Police have not prosecuted any sex workers for sex work, as prostitution is not an offence. However, foreigners who work as sex workers in Singapore have also violated the conditions of their entry into Singapore, and are considered prohibited immigrants under our law.

We will thus have to carefully consider the impact of granting immunity to such individuals on public safety and our criminal justice system as a whole.

Mr Louis Ng also shared about helping women transit out of sex work. Community partners do play an important role in helping Singaporean sex workers, be it in helping them transit out of sex work, or providing social support to them. The Government will support such efforts where possible.

But we must also recognise that most sex workers are foreigners, and foreigners who are prostitutes in Singapore would have flouted our immigration laws. Again, we have to carefully consider the impact of our policies on public safety and law and order.

I will next address Members' queries on specific clauses in the Bill.

Mr Darryl David and Mr Melvin Yong asked how the extra-territorial application of section 146A would be used in practice to target offenders based overseas. Er Dr Lee Bee Wah said the anonymity offered by some of these platforms could hinder investigations.

With the amendments to section 146A, we will be able to arrest offenders when they enter Singapore, even if they were overseas at the point of commission of the offence.

If they are in a country with which Singapore has a Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty (MLAT) or extradition treaty, it may be possible to seek their assistance for investigation or send an extradition request to the country, if this is practical or expedient. Even if there are no formal reciprocal agreements, the Police will work with our foreign counterparts to share information and conduct joint enforcement and investigation.

While we acknowledge that extra-territorial laws have their limitations, the amendments to section 146A will still be an improvement over what we have today. I explained the need for these amendments in my earlier speech.

To ascertain the identity of these offenders, the Police can rely on section 20 of the Criminal Procedure Code to order the production of any document or thing necessary for investigations. The Police also work with their overseas counterparts to share relevant information.

I have just set out how the Police will rely on the amended section 146A, to go after syndicate members overseas. The other amendment to section 146A, is to allow the Police to go after syndicate members in Singapore, even if they use a remote communication service based overseas. The amended section 146A is not only applicable to syndicates members overseas.

Mr Gan Thiam Poh, Mr Melvin Yong and Er Dr Lee Bee Wah asked about the use of social media and social messaging platforms to advertise the provision of sexual services in Singapore.

Most syndicates rely instead on dedicated websites, such as SGWolves, which was taken down last year. Many social media platforms have community standards and processes for users to report such posts to the company for take-down.

We thank Mr Gan for his suggestion to require internet intermediaries, such as social media providers, to do more to combat vice on their platforms proactively. MHA is also working with other Government agencies to study the issue. In doing so, we are seeking to find the right balance between our public safety outcomes, without imposing requirements that are unreasonably onerous on companies. In any case, such platforms are considered "remote communication services" under section 146A.

With these amendments to section 146A, syndicates which use these social media and social messaging platforms to advertise or facilitate the provision of sexual services in Singapore, will be liable for an offence, even if the server is overseas, or even if the person posting the advertisement is overseas.

Ms Anthea Ong and Mr Alex Yam asked if the higher maximum fines would be enough to deter the offenders. The higher maximum fines are part of a broader suite of amendments to better deter vice syndicates. The Bill also raises the maximum jail terms, and penalties for re-offending. Taken as a whole, this sends a strong signal to vice syndicates regarding the seriousness of the offence.

In determining the appropriate maximum penalties, we took into account the penalties in other relevant legislations, such as the PHTA, which also carries a maximum fine of $100,000, imprisonment of up to 10 years, and caning, even for first time offenders.

Additionally, the prosecution can also apply to confiscate vice earnings under the Corruption, Drug Trafficking and Other Serious Crimes (Confiscation of Benefits) Act, or CDSA, and we have done so in the past.

Several Members asked whether the identity checks, as a form of reasonable diligence, would be effective in deterring syndicates from renting premises for vice activities. Some said identity checks, by themselves, may not be helpful in determining the tenant’s motives, and asked if it would be fair to hold landlords responsible for tenants' subsequent actions.

At the point of signing the lease agreement or releasing the premises for occupation to a tenant, if the property owner or master tenant had done what was reasonably possible to ascertain that the premises is not going to be used as a brothel, the owner or master tenant will not be liable for an offence even if the unit is subsequently used as a brothel.

But, the tenant or occupier could be prosecuted for an offence of keeping, managing or assisting in the management of a brothel; the Bill does not amend or abolish this offence in section 148 subsection (1).

And where the tenant is not directly managing or keeping the brothel, the tenant cannot escape criminal liability unless: he or she can show that he or she had no knowledge and could not with reasonable diligence have ascertained, that the premises are used as a brothel.

The latter is an amendment in clause 12(b) in the Bill, which will make it harder for a tenant or occupant to turn a blind eye.

This is a balanced approach. We had considered imposing post-transaction requirements, such as spot-checks on the unit, installing CCTVs, or checking with the neighbours. We consulted a wide range of stakeholders on this and the general consensus was that it would be too onerous to impose legal obligations on property owners to implement post-transaction checks at this juncture.

Stakeholders said property owners or master tenants faced practical limitations. For example, as leases or sub-leases usually require them to respect the tenant's or sub-tenant's right to quiet enjoyment, it would be challenging to conduct surprise checks if the tenant or sub-tenant was not around to allow the inspection.

The owner or master tenant might arrange the inspection in-advance, but this would defeat the purpose of the checks since syndicates will remove any evidence of illegal activity. And, as Mr Louis Ng highlighted, the owner or master tenant may not be able to determine whether the place is used as a brothel. There were also concerns about potential risks to the personal safety of the person conducting the checks, if crime syndicates are involved in the running of brothels out of these rented premises. As Mr Darryl David and Er Dr Lee Bee Wah said, those who have done their reasonable diligence should not be unjustly punished. The Members are correct in this regard.

The proposed approach in the Bill for owners and master tenants to exercise reasonable diligence at the point of entering into tenancy agreements, is not too onerous and is something that many are already doing today.

As I said in my earlier speech, this amendment is also intended to get property owners and tenants started in asking the right questions. These will help deter syndicates attempting to misuse another person’s identity documents, in order to rent a place to be used as a brothel.

Mr Yee Chia Hsing asked if property owners can rely fully on property agents’ advice and to carry out the checks for them.

Property agents play an important role in helping homeowners and tenants comply with the law. We are therefore working with CEA to ensure that property agents are aware of these legislative changes and to introduce professional guidelines to ensure that property agents help owners and tenants meet these reasonable diligence requirements.

In my earlier speech, I also talked about the disciplinary action that property agents could be liable for, if they were found to have behaved negligently. Property agents are allowed to conduct checks on behalf of property owners who are unable to meet the prospective tenants in-person – for example, landlords who are overseas, or elderly landlords who may not be ambulant.

Apart from property agents, trusted parties such as a family member can also conduct these checks on their behalf.

However, an owner is ultimately responsible for the lease of his own property. Owners who rely on third parties to check should verify that the checks have been completed satisfactorily, before entering into the lease agreement or allowing the prospective tenant to occupy the property.

While property agents have a professional duty to advise their clients to the best of their abilities, and indeed most of them do so, the property owner should also be asking the right questions and satisfy himself or herself that the unit is being rented out in a responsible manner.

To Mr Melvin Yong’s question on the use of short-term rental platforms, the owner and tenant of the property-in-use are still responsible for the reasonable diligence requirements under section 148 of the Women’s Charter. In addition, there are rules in place regarding the illegal or unauthorised use of premises for short term accommodation. Property owners may also be liable for an offence under the Planning Act.

Just as Prof Fatimah Lateef, Er Dr Lee Bee Wah and Mr Alex Yam said, property owners, tenants and property agents are our "eyes and ears" on the ground. These amendments are part of our efforts to promote better collaboration with the community to remain vigilant against vice activities.

Neighbours, managing agents and security guards are also part of this larger community. We encourage the community to keep vigilant and report suspicious activities to the Police.

One final point – to Ms Anthea Ong's comment on the use of the term "mentally defective", I acknowledge her point and we will look into this in subsequent reviews of the Women's Charter.

Mr Speaker, I hope I have addressed Members' concerns. The Bill is needed to enhance our ability to deal effectively against vice activities of syndicates and individuals, especially those operating online, and to ensure better protection for our neighbourhoods from vice activities. Sir, I beg to move.

Mr Speaker: Mr Alex Yam.

4.45 pm

Mr Alex Yam: Mr Speaker, one clarification and one supplementary. Mr Speaker, I agree that no country has eradicated prostitution, but we can certainly try. Because in Singapore, we do the same for the vice of drugs and we do so with much pride. Banning drugs has not meant that we have completely eradicated them from our society but we have reduced the nefarious effects that come with these, such as violent crime, gangsterism and organised crime.

Prostitution is no different, brings with it sexual violence, organised crime and other after-effects.

I therefore ask if the Ministry would consider adopting an abolitionist route as adopted by France, Sweden and Iceland to criminalise the punters, the clients, but offer an escape route for a better life for those who are in this trade. As we have heard from many Members, many would not have willingly entered this trade. Having been involved in work in the welfare of sex workers in the region, what we can do to uplift a lot of communities is perhaps the most important part and there are a lot of levers that Singapore as a developed country can do.

At the end of the day, prostitution is no more than a repetitive round of sex acts. I hope that the Ministry can consider some of these for future legislation.

Ms Sun Xueling: I thank the Member for his clarification. As I mentioned earlier, the experiences in other countries – he mentioned Sweden – have been mixed. There is no consensus as to whether laws that criminalise demand for paid sex actually decrease the actual demand for sex. Some studies have assessed that any change in data simply reflected changes in policing practice and the way in which sex work is organised. We mentioned earlier, and some of the other Members have also mentioned, we do have grave concerns that by criminalising sex, we drive clients and sex workers underground and we make it harder for sex workers to protect themselves or for social workers to reach them.

Mr Speaker: Mr Louis Ng.

Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang: Thank you, Sir. I have three clarifications. One is on the immunity. I think the Senior Parliamentary Secretary mentioned that it is harder to grant immunity when there are immigration offences as well. So, can we look into at least granting immunity when there are no immigration offences? These really are the Singaporean sex workers.

Second, my call about funding for the next step programme, which is about helping Singaporean sex workers transit out of the industry, I think that is a much better way. Rather than keep trying to arrest them, we help them to get out of the industry, which will reduce the number of sex workers.

Third is whether MHA is open to having a closed dialogue with the sex workers themselves. Hear from them directly and see how we can work together to address some of the concerns that MHA has.

Ms Sun Xueling: On the first point that the Member mentioned, I would like to clarify that we actually do not prosecute Singaporean sex workers for sex offences, for providing sexual services, because it is not an offence. But for the foreign sex workers, they have committed an immigration offence and that is why they have to be deported.

On the second point about transiting out of sex work, I mentioned that we have various policies in place and this is something that the Government will also look into actively to help Singaporean sex workers transit out of the sex trade.

On the last point on a dialogue, I think that the Police, when they do come into contact with the sex workers, they do interact with them. But if he feels that there is a way for us to work even closer with VWOs to engage the sex workers, we will be happy to work with the Member further on this.

Question put, and agreed to.

Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House.

The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. – [Ms Sun Xueling].

Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed.