| |
The
Straits Times, 30 Dec 04
Views
split over proposed safeguards
by Kelvin
Wong and Glenys Sim
FOR those opposed to the idea of having a casino here, no amount of
'social safeguards' imposed by the Government would be able to sway
them. It is still a fundamental moral issue which they are up in arms
against. Mr V.R. Nathan, chairman of the Hindu Endowments Board, said:
'We don't support any form of gambling at all. Whatever controls there
are in place, we should tell citizens clearly not to get involved
in gambling.'
Agreeing, Mr Fong Hoe Fong, one of three founders of an online petition
called Families Against the Casino Threat in Singapore (Facts), said:
'It's not a question about safeguards. As far as I'm concerned, there's
no such thing as being a little bit pregnant. If you're into it, you're
into it.' The petition, which was started early this month, has garnered
over 19,000 signatures to date. The National Council of Churches in
Singapore also maintained its stand that it was opposed to the casino.
But those persuaded by the economic benefits of a casino cheered the
measures aimed at minimising problem gambling introduced yesterday.
Dr Gillian Koh, a research fellow at the Institute of Policy Studies,
said it was 'fairly comprehensive as a first cut'. In particular,
she was happy with the provision for close family members to exclude
persons with gambling problems from the casino.
Mr Kelvin Tan, managing director of Filipino gaming consultancy Sinorex
Holdings, said the guidelines were enough to deter the average Singaporean
from impulse gambling but 'not so strict that they become disincentives
for potential investors'. But some felt more could be done.
Former Straits Times columnist and ex-editor of The Business Times,
Ms Tan Sai Siong, who has written in favour of having a casino here,
would like to see the $100 levy tied to a deposit of $10,000 to 'make
sure only those who can afford it are allowed into a casino'.
Mr Gerard Ee, president of the National Council of Social Service,
said more thought needed to be given to easing problems brought about
by having a casino. 'How do you tell an alcoholic not to drink? He
doesn't even know he has a problem to begin with,' he said.
Problem gaming is an area the Government is planning to address, whether
or not the casino proposal goes ahead, said Dr Vivian Balakrishnan,
the Acting Minister for Community Development, Youth and Sports, yesterday.
It will devote more resources to step up community services and make
'adjustments to policy' on a basis of need, not tied to the money
made from gaming.
But a blanket ban on Singaporeans is not feasible, given that the
vast majority of people here are not likely to develop a gambling
problem. Already, more than $6 billion is wagered every year in legal
bets by Singaporeans here, with an estimated US$900 million (S$1.47
billion) gambled away by Singaporeans in casinos worldwide. So any
social cost that has to be considered is the 'incremental social cost'
associated with new local gamblers.
But Singaporeans like Mr Y.P. Lee, 31, a marketing officer, think
it should be up to individuals to make their own choices. 'After all,
if you want to look for vice, there are many currently existing on
our streets. The Government is merely responsible for ensuring that
there are safeguards in the first place.'
Besides, as Mr Ronald Tan, a consultant specialising in the hospitality
industry, points out, it is always possible for casinos to pay the
levy for its customers in order to keep them coming, a common practice
with London casinos where free memberships are the norm. In such cases,
the levy will merely hurt the operators. Forex trader Mr Vincent Yeo,
31, a self-proclaimed high-roller, advises self-restraint, saying:
'Leave gambling to the pros who can afford it. It's not a quick buck
system for the common Singaporean.'
ADDITIONAL REPORTING BY MARDIANA ISMAIL & LEONG WAI LENG
Rules to apply here
IF A casino is built here and the operator plays by the rules, here's
how it will affect you.
You must be 21 years old and above, obtain a day membership of $100
or an annual membership of $2,000 to enter. You can ask to be excluded
from the casino or that a problem gambler in the family be barred
from entry. You can't gamble in the casino if you are its employee.
You get no credit, unless you are a 'premium player' who can put down
at least $100,000 cash on the table. You should be able to tell the
casino operator your gambling budget so that it can stop you from
escalating your losses. You will see no advertisements on casinos
in the mass media. They are not allowed to advertise. You will see
information on gambling and help services displayed prominently by
the casino. It will also tell you the rules of games and odds of winning.
Casino staff will be trained to detect problem gamblers and how to
deal with them.
Social safeguards in other casinos in the region
HERE'S how other countries do it:
Malaysia: The one licensed casino in Genting Highlands bars Muslims
from entering.
South Korea: Only one of the 14 casinos in the country allows locals
to enter.
Laos: The one licensed casino is located in a hard-to-reach place.
India: Casinos are allowed only in Goa; a cap on the number of tables
and machines.
Nepal: Nepalese citizens are not permitted to enter the four casinos
in the country.
The Philippines: Different tax rates - 60 per cent tax on gross gaming
revenues from 'peso tables', 10 per cent tax on 'US-dollar tables',
which are open only to foreigners
|
|
