VIEWS ON CASINO DEBATES:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The figure 35,000 jobs predicted to be created by casino is
doubtful. Read the reasons given below:-
The debate has not been presented objectively with proper
evaluation of both pro- and anti- casino views. Before any studies
have been made on potential job losses due to negative impacts and
social problems, the government has invited casino operators to
present their proposals and release the figure that 35,000 jobs
will be created. Thus, the debates have missed something very
critical. The debates were biased not objective or balanced.
The government should have presented the full survey results
regions by regions of not just job creation but job losses due to
negative impacts from casino. The social problem i.e. 2% supposed
pathological gamblers given by the ministers appears
under-stated.
Many existing casinos in UK were not doing well and have to be
upgraded or regrouped to make them viable. Has the government
considered this fact? It was revealed unwittingly by the ministers
that the existing pathological gamblers were already 2 %. Once the
casinos were set up, by proximity factor, surely the pathological
gamblers will be higher or much higher than 2 % lah. Has the
minister Dr. V considered told the complete fact?
The onus is on the government making the decision to build casino
to prove its case to build casinos. The worse decision has been
made with people being asked to try it out to see what happens.
Such an attitude verges on downright irresponsible - 72,000 lives
in danger of being destroyed !!!
We have not evaluated on potential job losses due to negative
impacts of casinos and yet, we jump to the conclusion that casino
will create 35,000 jobs. The negative impacts, include business
bankruptcies etc due to addictions in gambling over say 5 years.
For all anyone knows, casino may lose its attraction after a while
as tourists decide that our casinos are stale not that attractive
after all. There is also the question of how many jobs will go to
the locals.
Many people have asked: is the government running out of ideas how
to run the economy? Clearly, it desperately needs an economic
master planner or plan to show how it will create a more
competitive economy. Such a master plan can be used to show how
casino coupled with our excellent location advantages (as compared
with other casinos) to stimulate overall economic growth.
I cannot see integration to tourism in passing as an economic
master plan at all. Without a total master plan to integrate casino
to all major business sectors or show our economic direction or
strategy, how can the MM claim in parliament : "without casino, our
economy will be worse off"? Such utterances were obviously without
basis.
A belief that a casino will benefit Singapore economy is only a
belief. The government should substantiate the decision with facts
from objective and balanced study not just beliefs or assumptions.
Since it was not substantiated objectively, with proper facts, the
casino decision will remain a poor decision - 35,000 jobs will be
created without quantifying long-term potential job losses and
social problems.
