Casino Control (Amendment) Bill - Part I

Sir, in early 2011, in this House, I cautioned against the potential addiction to easy casino tax revenue and warned that all that glitter is not gold. Then I urged the Government to consider taking the narrower but more sustainable growth path of developing and operating our very own tourism products, MICE industry products and so forth. And I asked then if there were plans to reduce the casinos to one or none in the future.

Back then, the responses to my questions sounded as though the casinos were here to stay − a done deal − and there was nothing we could do except for the then MCYS to tighten the social safeguards to lessen the social ills.

Sir, my uneasiness about permitting the casino operations in Singapore remains till this day. Singapore is fast becoming a top gaming destination. Revenue generated from the casino industry is seductive but the industry comes with proven social and security ills. In addition, the more successful casino operations appear, the greater the temptation and the opportunity cost to not focus on other more sustainable, value-adding economic ventures.

This uneasiness was slightly relieved as I study the latest Casino Control (Amendment) Bill.

I am grateful that four Ministries, no less, have now taken tangible steps to address the social, economic and security aspects of casino operations in Singapore. Sir, I support the Bill but would like to provide inputs on three specific areas: one, on the evaluation panel; two, on social safeguards; and three, on online gambling.

First, on the Evaluation Panel. Sir, one of the most prominent amendments, the new section 45 in clause 10 of the Bill is to add an Evaluation Panel appointed by MTI when granting new or renewing casino licences. This Panel is tasked specifically to ensure that the IR operators continue to develop, maintain and promote the IRs as compelling tourist destinations.

But, Sir, as my colleague, Member of Parliament Mr Seah Kian Peng, has mentioned, Singapore's IRs are no ordinary tourism products due to their casino gambling component. Our two casinos are located within a small geography in which any criminal and social ills can take root easily. Even as the proponents of the casinos sang praises about how thousands of jobs are created, one does not need to look far to know that the IRs' Human Resource gains are causing stress on the eco-system, leading to the loss of manpower in, for example, other F&B, hospitality and even the cleaning industries.

Because of the multiple impact on society at large, the traditional decision-making model for granting new or renewing existing casino licences needs to be updated. The new section 45 should provide for an Evaluation Panel that is one level higher than that proposed. The Panel should not be under the prerogative of the Ministry of Trade and Industry and individual industry and evaluated based on the KPI of whether the IR, including casino, is still a compelling tourist destination only. The Panel should be an inter-Ministerial one appointed by the Prime Minister's Office and a final decision by the Panel must take into consideration of not just jobs created − the economic aspects − but also an assessment of the degree of transfer of learning for our own economic sustainability; the diversion of manpower to this industry; and the impact on law and order and social resilience. The Evaluation Panel must be open to challenging the given assumption that casinos are here to stay, and the assumption that the decision is only limited to granting or renewing licences.

Second, on tighter social safeguards. Sir, I welcome the changes such as allowing the National Council of Problem Gambling (NCPG) and families to apply for casino visit limits of financially vulnerable people; enhancing NCPG's power to issue casino exclusion orders in justified cases; and the call for casino operators to install more comprehensive and visible Responsible Gambling programmes. These changes strengthen the social safeguards against the vulnerable who do harm not only to themselves but also to their families and friends. And I know, being part of the Government Parliamentary Committee (GPC) for MCYS or MSF, how sincerely and diligently the MSF Minister Chan Chun Sing and his team are, in carrying out this duty of installing further safeguards. But I have one concern.

Sir, these provisions leave out local residents who are currently not defined as being vulnerable but nonetheless are at risk of becoming financially vulnerable. I recall a resident of mine, an owner of a 3-room HDB flat, asking me several times to make an appeal on his behalf to ask the Government to scrap the annual casino entry levy.

He had succumbed to the glitter of gambling, wanted to make full use of the annual levy he purchased, and lost a lot of money at the casinos. It is also this other group, comprising foreigners who hold work permits, the low-income group, who may enter the casino to gamble even without having to pay an entry levy. In this regard, I once again appeal to Government to (a) scrap the annual casino entry fee option; (b) increase the per-entry charges; and (c) to find a way to disallow foreign workers on work permits to partake in casino activities.

Third, on online gambling. I also urge the Government to divert resources to hone our expertise in dealing with an up and coming trend in gambling, that is, online gambling. Online gambling is one of the fastest growing preferred gambling modes amongst the young and educated, and especially alarming in a nation as wired as Singapore. One needs only to access http://www.onlinecasinos.com.sg/ to be exposed to some of the most compelling advertisements on why one should gamble online. Let me show you what it looks like [A chart was shown to hon. Members].

Let me read to you some of what it says:

"Play at one of the most popular online casinos in Singapore!”

There are hundreds of online casinos in Singapore to choose from, but few that will offer you as many benefits for playing with them as we do! [The advertisement says.] Online casinos have become one of the most popular pastimes of our generation, so why not spend your time [It tells the reader] and money at an online casino in Singapore that gives you more value for your dollar?

[The editorial continues] All of our games, ranging from slots, blackjack, roulette and more are developed and designed by expert industry professionals skilled in online casino gaming software. Players can choose between either downloading our casino software to their Desktops or play our games online in browser wherever they are."

This is what was said in the editorial. The public website then goes on to entice readers with its easy sign ups, welcome offers to new players, loyalty credits, 24/7 multilingual customer support and unlimited free game play. No mention of responsible gambling, whatsoever. So we need to extend our safeguards and regulatory measures on online gambling and online casinos as well. There is an urgency for the whole of Singapore (Government and the rest of Singapore) to hone our ability to arrest this fast growing global trend of online gambling, before it is too late.

In conclusion, Sir, at the opening of the 2012 International Association of Gaming Regulation, Ministry of Trade and Industry Minister Iswaran said that "the risks (of casinos) will become more complex. Globalisation has led to an increase in transnational crime. Crime syndicates are getting more sophisticated. They use modern business techniques. They also leverage advanced information and communication technology to network with other syndicates, avoid detection by law enforcement agencies or render their illegal activities untraceable." Such is the name of the game.

Sir, the evaluation of the IR-casino strategy should not be made based on pure economic returns anymore. It was with good intent at the time when this strategy was embarked upon in 2005, 2006 and, yes, we should stop questioning the decision made back then. But we have new knowledge and experiences now. Hindsight vision is, of course, always perfect; but now that we see better, we must do better.

Indian political activist Mahatma Gandhi said, "Life is one indivisible whole." One cannot expect to do well in one compartment while not doing well in another, an equal system. We must wean ourselves from such a controversial and worrisome economic strategy. We will never match the sophistication expertise of the smooth casino operators and, at best, can only play catch-up to address the industry's ill effects. Singapore must resolve to engage experts and other fellow innovative Singaporeans to help imagine, create future tourism products that are less controversial and more wholesome. We must believe that our "can-do" Singapore spirit can lead us to develop our own brand of leisure entertainment products, theme park, Universal Studio, even better than that, but without casinos in tow.

Sir, I do not gamble but I was told that the Royal Flush in poker is ranked as the highest hand in the game of poker. It occurs when a player has an ace, a king, a queen, a jack and a ten of the same suit. If you are lucky enough to get a Royal Flush, then you should be sure to bet the entire pot because you will undoubtedly win the pot with the hand. But I was also told that one's best chance to get a Royal Flush in a casino is in the toilet.

Sir, when we reach the expiry timeline of whether to renew or grant new casino licences in Singapore, let us remember this − that the chances of a holistic win (economic, social, morale) for Singapore in this casino business are as good as that of getting the Royal Flush. We should therefore work towards exiting from the casino industry. With that hope in mind, I support the Casino Control (Amendment) Bill.