SINGAPORE AS HUB FOR MEETINGS, INCENTIVES, CONVENTIONS AND EXHIBITIONS

SINGAPORE AS HUB FOR MEETINGS, INCENTIVES, CONVENTIONS AND EXHIBITIONS: The following Question stood in the name of Mdm Ho Geok Choo –

11. To ask the Minister for Trade and Industry what lessons can be drawn from the teething problems at the Integrated Resorts so as to safeguard Singapore's reputation as a top hub for Meetings, Incentives, Conventions and Exhibitions (MICE).

12.

Mr Calvin Cheng asked the Minister for Trade and Industry whether the Integrated Resorts (IRs) are merely keeping to the letter rather than the spirit of the requirement for the IRs to have a significant area of non-gaming facilities, when presently the casinos are fully functional but a significant proportion of their hotel rooms and entertainment facilities are not fully ready.

Mr Calvin Cheng (Nominated Member): Question No. 11, Sir.

The Senior Minister of State for Trade and Industry (Mr S Iswaran) (for the Minister for Trade and Industry): Sir, may I have your permission to take Question Nos 11 and 12 together?

Mr Speaker: Yes.

Mr Iswaran: The recent opening of the Marina Bay Sands (MBS) Integrated Resort has added 69,000 square metres of exhibition and meeting space to the MICE industry in Singapore. When the phased opening of MBS is completed, about 100,000 square metres will be added to the total amount. And this will effectively increase the amount of purpose-built exhibition and meeting space in Singapore by more than half.

It is not uncommon for projects of this size to encounter, as the Member has

Column: 360

mentioned, "teething problems", especially when they commence operations. Nevertheless, it is regrettable that delegates at a recent conference found their experience at Marina Bay Sands to be unsatisfactory. I understand that MBS has taken the feedback of its clients into consideration and is already taking steps to address these issues.

Singapore's reputation as a top city for MICE events is important to the Government. But our reputation is not determined by a single conference. Rather, it is built over time, as a result of many factors that underpin our organisation as a city to provide the best value proposition to MICE organisers and delegates. This includes the accessibility to target markets for buyers and delegates, the presence of a pro-business environment and the overall appeal of the city to delegates and visitors.

Over the years, Singapore has developed sound fundamentals as a business destination and established a strong track record for successfully hosting many business events. Last year, the Union of International Associations (UIA) accorded Singapore the title of the world’s Top International Meeting City for the second consecutive year. Singapore has also been ranked as Asia’s top country and city for meetings for the last 25 years.

To put it in perspective, Singapore plays host to 6,000 business events annually, and accounted for more than 25% of the meetings held in Asia in 2008. Notable MICE events we have hosted in the past include the IMF-World Bank meetings in 2006, the APEC Summit in 2009, as well as business events such as the World Dental Federation Congress of 2009.

As the lead Government agency supporting the MICE industry, the Singapore Tourism Board (STB)works

Column: 361

with local industry partners including associations and organisers to bid for international exhibitions and conventions.

Collectively, Government agencies and the industry in Singapore have secured a robust pipeline of international business events for the next few years, and will continue to strive to maintain our standing as a global business events destination of choice.

If I may turn to Mr Calvin Cheng's point, international tourism projects such as the CityCentre Resort in Las Vegas, Wynn Resort in Macau and Universal Studios in Florida were all opened in phases. Locally, ION Orchard and Singapore Airport Terminal 3 are two examples of large local developments that also had phased openings. The phased opening of Singapore’s Integrated Resorts (IRs) is thus quite typical for projects of this scale and complexity.

From an operational perspective, phased openings are necessary to allow the IRs to work through operational issues and to allow employees to familiarise themselves with their new roles and gain confidence for the ramp-up in activities. Although the IRs were opened in phases, the casino licence was granted only when the Government authorities had established that at least 50% of the Gross Floor Area (GFA) was completed and at least 50% of the Development Investment (DI) had been expended. This was to ensure that the casino would be allowed to operate only when a significant amount of non-gaming facilities were opened and the integrity of the Integrated Resort concept upheld. When the IRs are fully opened, gaming areas would take up less than 3% of the GFA for Marina Bay Sands (MBS) and less than 5% of the GFA for Resorts World Sentosa (RWS).

Both IRs have, in fact, opened significant non-gaming facilities. RWS soft-opened with Universal Studios

Column: 362

Singapore, its theatre, part of the Festive Walk and four hotels. The next phase of its development will include the addition of new attractions in Universal Studios, the premier of a locally created circus theatre show, a Marine Life and Water Theme Park, and a Maritime experiential Museum. MBS’ preview opening included a significant amount of non-gaming areas such as 963 hotel rooms, retail outlets, restaurants, bars and MICE facilities. MBS expects to open its remaining facilities such as the Skypark, Theatres and Museum by the end of this year.

Mr Calvin Cheng: I thank the Senior Minister of State for his comprehensive reply and I do take his point regarding teething problems. But I would like to point out that we see the Integrated Resorts having teething problems with their hotel rooms, conference facilities, roller coasters but, funnily enough, not their casinos. I was wondering whatever the Ministry would consider taking a stronger stand in ensuring that the IRs keep to the spirit of the law rather than just the letter.

Mr Iswaran: Mr Speaker, Sir, I thank the Member for his question. First of all, if media reports are anything to go by, then I think even the casinos were affected by some of the teething problems. Secondly, I want to make it quite clear that, as far as Government agencies are concerned, there is absolutely no compromise on the fact that the concept of the IR must be upheld. That was the logic when we started this endeavour and Government agencies are committed to see it through. However, we must recognise that these are multi-billion dollar, multi-decade projects. When you are looking at projects of that kind of scale and complexity, first, phased openings are not uncommon at all when you look at international best practice and, secondly, we should not judge the outcome or the success of these projects on the basis of what we

Column: 363

have seen in the first few days, weeks or months.

Mr Low Thia Khiang: I would like to ask the Senior Minister of State, up to now, how much has the two IRs contributed to the tourism industry in Singapore. Secondly, there is a report that most visitors to the casinos are actually Singaporeans. Is that a concern to the Government?

Mr Iswaran: Mr Speaker, Sir, the first question on the contribution of the IRs to the economy – actually there is another question after this – but I will say that there have been significant investment commitments. To-date, together they have contributed more than S$12 billion worth of investments and they will be creating at steady state about 20,000 jobs, of which about 80% has already been realised and a significant proportion of that are for locals.

As for the patronage of the casinos, obviously, we want to ensure that Singaporeans who choose to go to the casinos give due thought to it before they go in and not to do it on impulse, which is why we have a whole slew of measures that have been put in place under the MCYS' approach towards ensuring that we do not have a problem with problem gambling. Having said that, I do not have specific data but it would be fair to say that, again, there is a novelty factor in play at the moment. To think that whatever we see at play in terms of numbers and of performance in the first few weeks and months is an accurate predictor of what is going to be happening 12 or 24 months down the road may be stretching the argument a bit. So what I can assure the Member is that the agencies are monitoring the situation closely and once we have a better sense of the patterns and trends, I think we will know how the measures we put in place are working.