Sir, I have three clarifications. One, on online gambling, I am heartened that there is a commission that is already commencing supervision on the non-casino operations. I wish to ask Minister if – while, we are taking the time to study the jurisdictions and enabling this commission to work, can there be some interim measures to, at least, have some semblance of an example of a responsible gaming regime, or even to block such sites, online casino sites, if possible, during this time? That is my first one.

The second is on annual fees – the request on scrapping the annual casino entry levy – if the amount is so small, may I ask the Minister if he would just scrap the annual levy, since the impact is small and the number of people buying such levies is small?

The third clarification is the long-term options for Singapore. When the time comes for the current contracts with the casino operators to be negotiated or renewed, or when the time comes for them to be expired, I want to ask Minister on the options that Singapore has. Are the options only limited to terminate and grant a new one, or two, to renew? Is there a third serious option to exit from this industry, or is it a given in our country that casinos are here to stay? I want to remind Minister of comments that he made at the International Association of Gaming Regulators this year that casino operations are becoming complex and crime syndicates are becoming more and more sophisticated. I do believe in everything that he has said in this speech so I want to remind the Minister of that. Second, is also the updated information that there are various competing casinos coming up, so if that is the setting that we are operating in, will there be a serious option that Singapore can exit from this industry? Thank you for your patience.

#########

Mr S Iswaran’s Reponse

#########

Sir, I wish to seek clarification from the MTI Minister on the 30-year contract that he mentioned. Is the contract of 30 years for the IR or for the casinos? Is there no provision at all? If it is for 30 years for the casinos, is there no provision at all for Singapore to exit the casino industry until 24 years later? That is my first question. Second one is on annual review. I think the higher the frequency of visits, then I think the higher the exposure to gambling and the higher possibility to perhaps problem gambling as well. I do think that this annual levy – while I will not consider it a loophole as Mr Png says – of course, hindsight is always perfect, so I do not want to blame Minister for that. But it is a – the annual levy provision is actually a "volume discount" so-called, which is quite a typical marketing strategy. In this context, it is really very special because we really do not want to encourage local residents to go visit the casinos. So I thought that there is still a case to scrap the annual levy. For your consideration, please.