Should we have a casino?
YES
I'VE always thought it was high time for Singapore to have a
casino. If Singapore seriously wants to promote itself as a fun
place, it has to do better than trumpeting bar-top dancing and
reverse bungee jumping.
I visited Las Vegas some years ago and, till this day, I remember
the dynamism and vibrancy of the place, the ebullient vibes.
Singapore has nothing remotely resembling a decent nightlife and is
positively boring, compared to cities such as Hong Kong and
Shanghai, and needs to reinvent itself to remain attractive to
foreign MNCs.
I don't foresee how organised crime, long a mainstay of an active
gambling scene and the bane of most governments, can ever abound,
much less take root, given the tightly-policed city state that
Singapore is.
Far from being a hive of criminal activity, a well-run and properly
regulated casino - Genting is an example - can be marketed as a
wholesome, family-oriented experience.
Monte Carlo in Monaco with its pristine and picturesque beaches,
resorts and a casino for the rich and pampered, has developed a
reputation for attracting high-rollers, the swaggering European
elite.
What if Singapore can position itself as the Asian equivalent with
Sentosa and the Southern Islands? As competitors go, Singapore has
virtually the entire playing field to itself. Thailand and the
resort islands of Indonesia, namely Bali and Bintan, are almost
exclusively for low-budget backpackers and nature lovers.
Hong Kong and Shanghai have a dazzling entertainment scene but lack
the beaches and the idyllic 'island resort' feel. Macau, popular
with high-stakes gamblers, is marred by its association with triads
and crime.
Aside from reaping the obvious economic gains of building a
world-class, luxurious playground for the rich and famous,
Singapore would be able to boost its international profile, much
like what Dubai has achieved.
Social problems will inevitably arise because gambling can have
adverse effects on the family setup, but I question the
impact.
SHANE HUANG JINWEI
IT IS good to see the Government exploring the feasibility of a
casino. It shows that the Government is willing to open its mind
even to subjects that have been considered taboo for the longest
time.
Granted there may be social repercussions but a progressive country
needs to stop worrying incessantly about too many things,
especially when the pros outweigh the cons, and the cons are not
all that insurmountable.
One of the biggest worries is addiction to gambling and the ensuing
problems. But there are already many outlets to satisfy the urge to
gamble, including the casino ships which may be inconvenient but
not all that inaccessible.
A minister said that one solution is to restrict entry to those of
a certain economic class. But that smacks of elitism and
discrimination, not the done thing for a country that wants to be
seen as progressive and dynamic, judging from the Uniquely
Singapore campaign.
I remember visiting a casino that issued entry cards with date and
time of entry marked on them. On each card, there are boxes with
denominations from $5 to $100. Each time you change cash for chips,
the croupier would stamp the appropriate boxes. This is in essence
your credit limit for the night. It also helps you keep track of
your losses.
I also remember seeing cards with a helpline you can call if you
felt that you needed help. I believe this was a casino in the
United States, although I cannot remember which as I had visited a
fair number in my reckless youth!
Of course, you could also apply for membership and be given a card
for entry without the credit limit.
My point is that it is possible to have measures to minimise any
fallout. Encourage the formation of self-help groups, make it
mandatory for the casino operator to contribute funds for
counselling programmes...
It would be a pity to dismiss this potentially lucrative source of
revenue simply out of fear.
ALICIA TAN GEK CHENG (MS)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NO
I STRONGLY object to having a casino in Singapore.
The Govern-ment has always rejected calls to have a casino because
it knows it can cause great harm to Singaporeans, especially those
who are unfortunate enough to have a close family member who is
addicted to gambling. Families have broken up and children
suffered.
So what if many Singaporeans are already gambling in neighbouring
countries or on cruise ships?
While we want to attract rich tourists we must not forget that we
are harming our own people just to satisfy the few who will benefit
from the opening of a casino.
I feel sad for Singapore if this is what we call 'Remaking
Singapore'.
When I was young, I was proud to learn that Singapore became
successful despite the fact that we did not have any natural
resources.
We faced difficult times and yet we overcame every difficulty to be
where we are today, thanks to our early leaders, without whom we
would not be able to enjoy a good life.
I fear for the future of Singapore if our leaders think it is all
right to set up a casino now because we must keep up with the
times. It takes strong leaders to reject pressure from a few.
There are certain businesses we should never get involved in and
gambling is definitely one of them. How could one enjoy spending
money that had caused families to break up and children to suffer
because their parents went to the casino in Sentosa, our resort in
the sun?
It is even more ridiculous to suggest that we divide Singaporeans
into classes - the 'can go' and the 'cannot go'.
I know of a man who earned $10,000 monthly who would spend all his
salary within two days in a casino and return home empty-handed and
in a daze. He did this for the last two years.
What happened to his family? The children suffered.
KELVIN LING WAI PING
IN RESPONSE to the proposal to set up a casino in Sentosa to make
Singapore a more attractive travel destination, I urge the
authorities to tread carefully.
Hong Kong, for instance, has increasingly recognised that gambling
is a fiercely addictive activity, and that an addiction to it
plagues a considerably large proportion of its population.
Such is the government's concern that numerous campaigns have been
implemented to educate the public on the dire consequences of
gambling addiction, and particularly how it could, very possibly,
adversely affect one's family and loved ones.
The way Hong Kong deals with the problem of gambling addiction is
not unlike how we discourage drug abuse. Prime-time television
programming is peppered with campaign advertisements which inform
viewers of the far-reaching consequences of their gambling
habits.
Viewers are also reminded that a counselling service and hotline
are available for addicted individuals.
Clearly, such action was taken because it is a serious problem;
many an individual's dalliance with gambling has spiralled out of
control, with dire conse-quences.
Closer to home, there is much value, and truth, in urban legends
and grandmothers' tales of how gamblers lost their home and
family.
Singapore's largely Asian population is not unlike Hong Kong's.
Culturally, we are very similar. We both share an inherent
enthusiasm for food, shopping - and gambling.
Although Hong Kong's gambling problems are not solely
casino-linked, the scale ought to be a warning to us.
Are we ready to deal with the numerous social problems which would
follow from making gambling even more accessible than it already
is, and on a larger scale? Would introducing a casino lead to
problems which we have largely avoided, quite successfully, by
restricting legalised gambling to its current forms?
JONATHAN WONG SHOOU-HUANG
Taken from ST forum section 260304
