Last year, some 4,310 foreign prostitutes were arrested, up 34% compared to the year before. The easing of our visa requirements to some countries to promote inbound tourism has contributed to this increase. To counter this, ICA takes a calibrated approach to detect non-genuine visitors. Thus, visitors suspected of coming here for vice activities are subject to further checks and interviews. In addition, foreigners, including student pass and work permit holders found to be involved in vice activities, are repatriated and banned from entering Singapore again. As many of the foreign sex workers congregate in Geylang, Police has stepped up enforcement operations there. Last year, Police deployed CCTVs along selected streets generally to prevent crime, but they also had a salutary effect of deterring solicitation by sex workers. Police also works with partners, such as the Hotel Licensing Board and URA, to conduct joint checks on budget hotels and lodging houses there. Let me therefore say that, like crime and drugs, vice is under control here. Police is well aware that on all three fronts, the Integrated Resorts will indeed present criminals with new possibilities to exploit. Hence, Police, together with the Casino Regulatory Authority which is under MHA, is already gearing up. And the assurance is that they will be ready to tackle this new challenge. Sir, as our society matures, we will continue to refine our criminal justice system. Thus, we are calibrating our approach towards the rights of accused persons with regard to their access to counsel when in police custody, a point raised by Mr Hri Kumar and also by Mr Alvin Yeo in the House when he spoke on the Budget Statement on Tuesday. Sir, the right of an accused person to legal counsel, as Mr Kumar will know, is found in our Constitution, Article 9(3). The courts have determined that this right may be exercised within a reasonable time, not immediately, upon arrest. Basically, I think we need to strike a balance between an accused person's rights on the one hand and the protection of the public interest to ensure that Police is able to effectively investigate the case. Our laws require every accused person to be brought before a Magistrate without unreasonable delay within 48 hours of his arrest. If Police wants to further remand the accused, it has to make out a case before the Magistrate. A recent police study showed that more than 90% of arrested persons were released within 48 hours. A robust monitoring system ensures that for the rest, investigations are completed expeditiously, so that there is no unnecessary remand. In fact, only 1% of arrested persons were remanded beyond a week. Generally, this 1% involved more serious and complex cases that required further police investigations or more intensive police investigations. The key point, therefore, is this: that in the vast majority of cases, accused persons are released early and do have early access to counsel. Still, we have looked at how we can improve the current situation. Therefore, Police piloted a project in March last year for remanded accused persons to meet their lawyers earlier, ie, towards the end of the one-week remand period, on condition that the accused person does not discuss the case with his lawyer. Police may allow this even though investigations have not yet been completed. We will review the outcome of this pilot some time in the middle of this year. Next, Mr Kumar suggests that we video-tape police interviews to guard against police abuse. As he rightly pointed out, I have explained earlier in this House that doing this will not avert such allegations of abuse. This is because the suspect can still allege that he was threatened before the recording or during breaks in the recording. The court thus cannot readily rely on such recorded interviews. There is feedback also from jurisdictions which have implemented this. In fact, I understand in one jurisdiction, even in the police car, while the suspect is being transported to the police station, there could already be threat taking place. To put things in perspective, let me say that the suspect's statements are usually only one piece of evidence, amongst others, such as the witnesses' testimony or physical evidence obtained at the crime scene, which Police uses to prove its case against the accused. Of course, Mr Kumar knows, in any case, in court, we have an established process called "voir dire " or "trial within a trial" to establish the voluntariness of the statement. So the key question really is this: do Singaporeans have confidence in our legal system and our Police Force? Like I have said, surveys have indicated that on both counts, this is the case. Indeed, this is unlike some of the countries where video-taping of police interviews has been implemented, thereby creating pressure for the video-taping. Sir, this position in public trust in Police has been secured after a long time. I am sure Police will not do anything that will erode Singaporeans' confidence in them and, indeed, neither will DPM nor myself and the Commissioner of Police. So for police abuse, we will be the first to say, "Hey, don't do that." Once again, Mr Chong presses me for an update of the Penal Code. I think this must be the fourth or fifth time in COS. Thank you for his compliments. Indeed, we are seeing light at the end of the tunnel. I did report in COS last year that we would hold a public consultation exercise when the amendments were ready. This exercise was launched in November last year via the REACH portal. Many Singaporeans took this opportunity to provide valuable feedback on the proposed amendments. We received, in fact, some 250 responses on the portal, and many more through the email and post which, of course, we were gratified to note. We also organised three focus group sessions to seek input from Singaporeans from different walks of life. We are also seeking input from the Law Society and the courts. We are now studying the many inputs received and plan to introduce the Bill in Parliament some time in the middle of this year. Mr Chong also points out that we have kept some archaic notions in the Penal Code. He talked about "horses and carriages" in various sections. Let me first say that we have actually updated and clarified many definitions, explanations and expressions in the Code, some 21 sections. But as for "horses and carriages", I have asked my officers to go and check with the Attorney-General's Chambers. I know that they have gone through it and found the phrase in some exceptions and explanations. But, indeed, if they detract rather than aid in explaining the section, we can remove them.