Casino-related Gambling Problems

Mr Christopher de Souza asked the Acting Minister for Community Development, Youth and Sports (a) whether the number of gamblers turning to the National Council on Problem Gambling for help as a result of casino-related gambling debts has risen between 2008 and 2011; (b) whether the Voluntary Welfare Organisations recorded an increase in the number of casino-related and problem gambling cases; and (c) what plans does the Ministry have to ensure that the ill-effects of gambling arising from casino addiction are stopped.

MG [NS] Chan Chun Sing: Mr Speaker, Sir, MCYS shares the concerns of many Members in this Chamber on the issues related to problem gambling. Problem gambling is a multi-faceted problem as studies have shown that problem gamblers participate in a range of gambling products. The gambling participation of problem gamblers is an issue that MCYS closely monitors.

We have previously conducted two gambling participation surveys in 2005 and 2008. The earlier studies indicated that both probable pathological and problem gambling rates among Singapore residents are between 1% and 2%. We are conducting our next survey, as we speak, and will share the findings when ready next year.

The opening of the casinos in 2010 has two possible effects. One, it creates new demand for casino gambling, and two, it substitutes previous demand for casino gambling. Even before the local casinos opened, demand for casino gambling existed as shown in our 2008 gambling participation survey where about one in 10 respondents reported participating in casino gambling overseas.

Although there is demand for casino gambling even before the local casinos opened, it is now easier for local gamblers to visit the casinos. Coupled with our public education efforts to encourage help-seeking, it is not surprising that more individuals and families are coming forward to seek help for gambling-related problems.

We see more individuals and families coming forward to seek help − this is the first step to recovery. There are counselling and treatment services at the Tanjong Pagar Family Service Centre and the National Addictions Management Service (NAMS) respectively. The total number of clients seen by these two agencies was 304 in 2008, and has been increasing. From January to August 2011, the number of cases seen was 568.

Page: 458

Individuals and families can also utilise casino exclusion measures. In terms of casino exclusions, as at 30 September 2011, there were 750 Family Exclusion Orders, 28,600 Third-Party Exclusions and 29,000 Self-Exclusions in force. The number of casino exclusion cases has also been increasing since the IRs opened.

The National Council on Problem Gambling (NCPG) has also engaged other legal gambling operators to implement exclusions. For example, individuals can already apply to exclude themselves from jackpot rooms in Singapore. These include those run by SAFRA and NTUC. They can also exclude themselves from the Telebet accounts of Singapore Pools and Singapore Turf Club. Families that have requested for casino exclusion for their family members are informed of these other exclusion options. There are, however, gambling forms such as 4D and Toto for which exclusion is difficult to enforce as the gambler can easily circumvent any exclusion by asking someone else to bet on his or her behalf.

Voluntary Self-Exclusion is available to both Singapore residents and foreigners. Employers of foreign workers can facilitate the applications for their workers to voluntarily exclude themselves from the local casinos. They can do so via the NCPG website or in hardcopy by hand or by registered mail.

Foreign workers may also apply for exclusion in person at the NCPG office or the Migrant Workers Centre. As at 30 September 2011, we have 22,700 Self-Exclusions by foreigners. This is encouraging but we can do more and NCPG will continue to monitor the take-up rate for exclusion by foreign workers.

NCPG will continue to strengthen gambling counselling and help services. The Council is currently looking into providing a wider suite of services in terms of integrated credit, legal and financial advisory services. The integrated services will better equip families to minimise the harm, especially financial harm, from heavy gambling as well as problem gambling.

My Ministry will continue to closely monitor to ensure the efficacy of existing social safeguards. We are prepared to strengthen the safeguards, if necessary, especially to protect the vulnerable groups in our society.

Mr Christopher de Souza: I like to thank the Minister for his comprehensive reply and for realising that there is indeed a lot of terrain to have to combat where gambling is concerned. My supplementary question is one to do with self-exclusion. I think self-exclusion requires a sense of discipline on the part of the person to say I do not want to gamble. Some addicts do not have that discipline. Neither do people who are attracted to the lure of gambling have or may not have that discipline. So rather than be over-reliant on self-exclusions, I would like to ask the Minister whether he would see how we can deter or reduce the lure of gambling, for example, advertisements put in the papers by the casinos of their latest gadgets or gambling machines. Alternatively, a reduction on their ability to advertise big wins. My supplementary question is based on discussions with NGOs who have disclosed to me their dealings with problem-gambling addicts and that the solution is really to reduce the lure of gambling.

Page: 459

MG [NS] Chan Chun Sing: Mr Speaker, Sir, I thank Mr Christopher de Souza for his comments. Indeed, we agree with him that self-exclusion requires much discipline on the part of the individual. But we also know that not every individual will have the necessary self-discipline because if he has it in the first place, he may never get into trouble at all.

Beyond individual self-discipline, I think it is equally important for us and especially for those people that get into harm's way, to have the support of the family and the society, which is why for all the pathological gambling cases, all the problem gambling cases, it is so important for us to have the supportive framework that includes the closest family members, the society and friends. One of the ways where we can do this and improve upon this is that when we see somebody close to us who displays signs of being troubled by gambling-related issues, we should quickly highlight this and assist the person to get help as soon as possible before the problem becomes worse. And this is the same line of defence that we would like to have beyond the individual to the family to the society. All of us will need to play a part and work closely to prevent this problem from getting worse.

We also agree that we have to deter this lure of gambling and the glamour that seems to come with it, with misleading advertisements. Indeed, we have in place measures to make sure advertisements do not target our local population. I am sure we will all recall that not too long ago, there was an operator who targeted some of our people from the heartlands and we had taken decisive measures to stop this. With a recent change, any advertisements will come under MCYS to allow us to have a more direct influence over these. And we will not allow operators to misrepresent with advertising of those rare big wins to lure people in. All these are necessary measures and there will be many more of such issues that we must handle to educate our people on the dangers of gambling.

Indeed, from the feedback of the VWOs, in order to reduce gambling, we have to take a comprehensive approach that must include education from a young age to the dangers of gambling, to the wider issues of how we can help family members detect signs that their family members are getting into trouble, or even help to educate the rest of our population to look out for signs of problem gambling amongst friends and colleagues in the workplace. Prevention is better than cure. When we see something is not going right, we should all work together to try and provide help as much as we can before the person falls deeper into problem gambling.

We are concerned with this issue, with or without the casinos. As I shared with Members just a while ago, even before the advent of the casinos, we already had 1% to 2% who suffer from pathological or problem gambling. We are watching this very closely and we want to continue to ensure that we have a situation that we can manage, although we may never be able to eradicate gambling from society totally.

Mr Liang Eng Hwa (Holland-Bukit Timah): Sir, two supplementary questions. Firstly, I would like to ask the Minister: for those 568 who sought help, what is the success rate? Have they been able to eradicate their gambling habits? Secondly, I have a different view from Mr Christopher de Souza: I wonder if the Ministry would promote this exclusion – whether it is a family exclusion or a third-party exclusion – more intensely in the community so that we can get more of our residents to be on this exclusion list and then, to prevent them from going to the casinos.

Page: 460

MG [NS] Chan Chun Sing: Mr Speaker, Sir, we thank Mr Liang Eng Hwa for his questions. On the first issue of the success rate, I think I will not want to be complacent because the way we look at the issue is that even if a person has "recovered" at that moment in time, the person can always relapse or succumb to it again unless we continue to provide the same support at the individual, family and society levels. We have quite encouraging stories of people who have come forward to seek help and they have gone on to a better life. But from my own personal experience, I know that gambling is not a problem that might just go away because someone has sought treatment at that point in time. It is something that we have to be continually watchful of.

A recent programme on Channel NewsAsia was very illuminating. There was this story of a person who got into trouble, went to seek help, got out of trouble, repaid all his debts, got married, lived a happy family life. And one day, he was just tempted to go in to the casinos and he fell into the trap again. So, we have to be very, very conscious about this and never, never be complacent that just because someone has recovered, he will move on from there. We have to watch this very carefully −

Mr Speaker: Major General, one minute left, please.

MG [NS] Chan Chun Sing: On the second issue of exclusion, yes, indeed we are expanding our efforts to encourage people, especially those from the at-risk group, to voluntarily subscribe to self-exclusion. We are working with employers to facilitate self-exclusion for foreign workers, even at the point of time before they enter Singapore, that is, when they apply for the permits. With this in place, we hope to continue our efforts to educate our people and provide the necessary support to continue to ensure that we manage this problem to the best of our ability. But it is a never-ending challenge.

3.00 pm

Mr Speaker: Order. End of Question Time.

[ Pursuant to Standing Order No 22(3), Written Answer to Question No 12 on the Order Paper is reproduced in the Appendix (Pg 517). Question No 11 has been postponed to the next available sitting of Parliament. ]