| |
The
Straits Times, 18 Nov 04
Forum on Gaming: Casino resort may
boost GDP, says economist
The 230 people at a public forum on merits of a casino yesterday were
almost equally split, with slightly more than half for the proposal,
report Joyce Teo and Tan Tarn How
A CASINO resort may boost Singapore's Gross Domestic Product (GDP)
by at least 1 to 2 per cent, an economist has estimated, even as others
warned that the economic pay-offs of gambling can be exaggerated.
It's about freedom of choice too.
A casino could create 3,600 jobs, 1,500 of which full-time; and add
$500 million to the nation's GDP (the total market value of goods
and services produced here), said Singapore Management University's
Associate Professor Winston Koh yesterday. His 'back-of-the-envelope
calculations' - the first public projected quantification of a casino's
economic pluses here - were derived from studies of Australian casinos,
he said at a public forum held by think-tank Institute of Policy Studies
(IPS).
A casino also has the potential to stem the 'leakage' of some $1.8
billion to $2 billion that Singaporean gamblers lose annually at casinos
overseas, he said. Time is of the essence as international gaming
companies, such as MGM-Mirage and Kerzner International, are looking
at other places to set up shop, he said. Significant revenue from
non-gaming activities such as entertainment and conventions can be
generated; and overall visitor arrivals should rise, said another
of the 12 speakers yesterday, Mr Sanjay Mathur, the executive director
of Asian economics at financial firm UBS AG.
But estimates of benefits are often exaggerated, he said. This is
because 'some cannibalisation' may result as casino hotels are often
marked down heavily and this may affect other hotels, a point which
Prof Koh agreed with. Many of the jobs created may not ease unemployment
as skills needed by casinos often have to be imported, said Mr Mathur.
Many speakers warned about the costs of a casino. A third of casinos
worldwide flop, and if the casino here does, its hotel, food and beverage,
entertainment and other supporting industries will get dragged down,
said Government of Singapore Investment Corporation's director (economics
and strategy), Mr Yeoh Lam Keong.
Many panellists and members of the audience also warned against the
social and other ills. They said it would lead to an 'epidemic' of
gambling-related problems like crime and suicide. Reactions were impassioned.
One anti-casino audience member, told that she had already made her
stand earlier, said: 'I paid $100 to state my views and that's what
I am doing!' Even casino proponent consultant Ronald Tan warned of
over-gambling, and suggested entry by membership and credit checks;
and making sure the casino has psychologists on site to help problem
gamblers. If a casino is built, Singapore will have to improve its
social services, National Council of Social Service president Gerard
Ee said. Even now, Singapore is 'ill-prepared' to address the existing
problems of gambling addiction, much less those that will arise with
a casino, he added. Others warned that giving the nod to a casino
could lead to pressure to legalise drugs next.
But audience member K.C. Chew said he was unconvinced by the 'slippery
slope argument', noting that there is plenty of legalised and illegal
gambling here as it is, to a tune of $2 billion a year. Casino opponents
also said that other options of reviving Singapore's tourism industry
should be considered first.
IPS director Tommy Koh said one way is to build a world-class museum
or put 'serious money' into making the arts and film festivals Asia's
best. Two places which have succeeded in drawing tourists without
casinos are Dubai and Hong Kong, said investment consultant Steve
Wyatt.
In a poll of the forum audience on whether Singapore should proceed
with the casino, 40.6 per cent felt the economic benefits were not
a strong enough reason, 43.2 per cent disagreed due to the social
impact, and 38.5 per cent, on the moral impact. Overall, 42.8 per
cent said Singapore should not proceed with the idea.
It's about freedom of choice too
GOOD moral arguments can be marshalled in support of a casino as much
as they can be posed against building one, said panellists in a public
think-tank forum yesterday. Casino resort may boost GDP, says economist.
One is that as 'individuals freely choose to gamble, it is no business
of others to interfere with how they spend their legitimately acquired
money', said National University of Singapore philosophy department
head Ten Chin Liew.
Freedom to gamble can thus be seen like freedom to engage in religious
practices - as in a tolerant society, a majority does not impose its
practices on a minority, he said at the Institute of Policy Studies-organised
forum. Otherwise, many public projects of great value, such as expressways,
would have been condemned right from the start because they affect
some people adversely, he added. 'So even if gambling is regarded
as intrinsically bad, this in itself is not a reason to deny gamblers
the freedom to gamble,' he argued.
Gambling public policy expert Peter Collins of Salford University
in Britain agreed a ban on moral grounds amounts to imposing one's
values on others, which is wrong. True, there are social ills from
compulsive gambling which affect a minority of people, but that is
not enough reason to 'deprive people of the choice of gambling'. Noting
that a casino can be supported on philosophical and democratic grounds
and not just for its economic benefits, he added: 'The arguments on
moral grounds are not all on one side of the issue.' Mr Collins is
also head of the leading British charity that addresses the problem
of gambling addicts.
Professor Ten also addressed the point made by Acting Minister for
Community Development, Youth and Sports Vivian Balakrishnan two days
ago, when he said the debate should move from 'money versus values'
to whether most Singaporeans can be trusted to act responsibly. Nevertheless,
many participants who were against the casino still argued the issue
from a predominantly moral standpoint. But Prof Ten argued that those
who say gambling is a moral issue, and should not be assessed by the
cost-benefit analysis yardstick, forget that, despite some bad social
effects, it is not inherently unjust like slavery. Gambling is 'self-regarding'
in that it does not affect other people and is not forced on one,
although Prof Ten admitted casinos often reduce people's free will
and control over themselves by 'all sorts of techniques'. 'Therefore
we have to address these issues, which affect freedom of choice.'
Against
NOT ON ANY TERMS
'We are against having a casino. That's even if we were to have restrictions.
If the casino does not work well, there is the possibility that restrictions
may be relaxed to attract more people.' USTAZ AZMI ABDUL SAMAD of
the Singapore Islamic Scholars and Religious Teachers Association
(Pergas)
TOO MANY PROBLEMS
'Buddhism is against gambling because of the social and crime problems
that come with it. But if there should be gambling, it is better to
legalise it and set guidelines so that there is some control. Sri
Lanka is a Buddhist country but we have a casino.' VENERABLE K. GUNARATANA
of Mahakaruna Buddhist Society
TARNISHING S'PORE'S IMAGE
'What do we want? If we want to promote Singapore as an education
hub or a health hub, the casino is contradictory to the brand.' MS
ANGELA LOKE, volunteer brand consultant with Christian-based organisation
Focus on the Family S'pore
ENCOURAGING AN EPIDEMIC
'We already have a big problem with gambling... It's creeping through
society like a virus. Why do we want to turn the virus into an epidemic?
An integrated resort is not a place to take children. It's like telling
them: 'You can see what I am doing but you can't do what I am doing.'
' MRS LEAENA TAMBYAH, adviser to Asian Women's Welfare Association
For
LOOK AFTER YOURSELF
'Whatever comes, you must learn how to protect yourself. There is
a Chinese proverb, yinye feishi, which means 'Don't starve yourself
just because you are afraid of choking'.' MADAM CHUA FOO YONG of MediaCorp
TV.
GAMBLING CULTURE
'Don't think that you are a society of virgins. You've got a lot of
gamblers as it is. It's not like you will have an epidemic problem
when you have a casino.' PROF PETER COLLINS, director of the Salford
University's Centre for the Study of Gambling & Commercial Gaming,
referring to a report that ranked Singapore third in per capita average
amount lost to gambling, after Norway and Australia
TRY IT AND SEE
'The most practical way to try out a 'transparent casino' is to do
it ourselves on a small scale. We could try out our transparent casino
by renting a facility, say for six months.' MR LARRY HAVERKAMP, The
New Paper financial columnist, proposing a pilot transparent casino
that will make all gaming odds known, or sell gambling chips at a
premium and then make games 'even odds'
A CHANCE TO SHINE
'Singapore will be one of the few countries in the world today to
show that we could operate a model casino, profitable and rich in
entertainment, yet with a minimum of the social side effects.' MR
RONALD TAN, consultant |
|
