STREAMING IN PRIMARY SCHOOL

Column: 426

STREAMING IN PRIMARY SCHOOL: 2.

Assoc. Prof. Ong Soh Khim asked the Minister for Education in view of the strong cultural bias towards students in a certain stream after the streaming in primary school, how will the Ministry make streaming passive so that it does not stress the students and their parents.

The Minister of State for Education (Mr Chan Soo Sen) (for the Minister for Education): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, streaming in schools is a practical approach to help students with different abilities and learning styles so that they can develop as best as they can. We do this for the best interest of the children.

There are some students in each cohort who are unable to cope with the regular primary school curriculum, despite the best efforts of the teacher and student. They benefit from taking a simpler curriculum, which helps them sustain an interest in learning instead of failing repeatedly in their subjects.

Parents whose children are in the EM3 stream, which I presume is what Prof. Ong is referring to, have the choice of putting their children in the regular Primary 5 curriculum as well as EM3. They choose to have their children in the EM3 stream because they believe that it benefits them.

We are introducing greater flexibility into the streaming system where it is practical and educationally beneficial to do

Column: 427

so. EM3 students who are strong in their mother-tongue can now offer Mother Tongue Language, instead of Basic Mother Tongue Language. In addition, schools are taking a more flexible approach to see how they can deliver the EM3 curriculum. EM3 students nowadays join the same class as their peers for specific subjects where there is educational benefit in doing so. In fact, just a few days ago, I believe that in Zaobao, there was a report of how the two groups of students are working together and enjoying each other's company. This is similar to the way the schools are banding students in the regular classes according to their strengths and weaknesses in specific subjects. So I believe issues, like cultural bias, and so on, should not arise with such flexible approaches.

Column: 427

PROPOSAL TO DEVELOP INTEGRATED RESORTS: Order read for resumption of debate on Question [18th April 2005],

"That the Proposal to Develop Integrated Resorts be considered by Parliament.". - (Deputy Leader of the House).

Question again proposed.

Mdm Ho Geok Choo (West Coast): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, many Singaporeans, who feel strongly against the casino, have voiced the view that the IR is a camouflage for the casino. Like many of these Singaporeans, I too had my initial objections to the idea of a casino in Singapore because of my religious convictions.

I may not have direct experience with the negative impact of gambling. I grew up observing the bonding effects that mahjong games and " si sek " (the 4-colour cards) have on family members and relatives of a close friend. I remember vividly how my close friend's family look forward to every weekend, where her mother would be doing major cooking and

Column: 428

baking for her children, in-laws, grandchildren and close friends who would gather at her home for mahjong gaming first thing in the morning on weekends. Whoever was the winner at the end of the day would pay for the food. There was monetary transaction in all these games, although the stakes were small.

Sir, from this perspective, the game of mahjong was a vehicle in bringing the family members to spend time together. Nonetheless, if gambling arises out of greed to enrich oneself and the whole mind is consumed by this indulgence then we are in trouble! In one feedback session with professionals, housewives and retirees

who voiced strongly on the social ills of casino gambling, I was awakened by the stories of how gambling has caused so much agony to families. I can empathise with those who feel strongly against gambling of sorts and I respect their viewpoints. However, taking a more in-depth approach into the subject matter, I began to develop a better understanding of the rationale for the IR in Singapore.

Whilst I still have my own personal convictions about the ills of gambling, I have shifted my paradigm to accept the economic rationale for the set up of an IR. It is not about the casino in the IR. But in wanting to remake Singapore into a global city, we simply cannot remain as a cultural and economic backwater. As spoken by many of my parliamentary colleagues, neither do we have a good reason to reject the potential 35,000 jobs that can fill the 35,000 empty stomachs.

I had an interesting conversation two evenings ago with an old grassroots leader on this recent debate. This gentleman, who is about 70 years old, grew up in a farm and plantation in old Jurong with his extended two-generation family members. He told me that the re-making of Singapore and the change that we are going through now is very similar to what he experienced in the early

Column: 429

1960s. He related the strong kampong opposition in old Jurong in the early 60s when the Government started its re-settlement programme to re-house kampong dwellers to high-rise flats. These farmers felt dislodged from the comforts of their kampong life and resented being pigeon-holed in the high-rise public housing. There were outcries that big families were being separated by this resettlement programme which would lead to erosion of extended family ties, " gotong-royong " spirit and, instead, nurturing of self-centredness and selfishness because the family nucleus was now much smaller and the pigeon-holed dwelling encouraged each to keep to his own.

There was also a need to retrain themselves for other vocations as they could no longer do farming. Other laments included the ills of living in high-rise flats as they provided convenient suicide platforms for people to jump down. This reminds me of a remark my parliamentary colleague Gan Kim Yong made to me during the recent Budget debate. He asked me how I would feel and face the family members whose breadwinner had jumped down due to gambling debts and also if this family happened to be my constituents. Extending Gan Kim Yong's question further, this question should also be posed to the decision-makers who made the decision to build high-rise flats in the 60s in Singapore. In this analogy, high-rise flats have made it easy for suicidal individuals to end their life! Sir, there will be no end as to who is to be blamed for one's final fate.

The casino debate is also being debated among my three children. My 12-year-old daughter, in her pure innocence, uttered, "So bad! How can we allow for gambling in Singapore?" Her two elder brothers responded, "There may

Column: 430

be gambling in Singapore but you are in control of yourself and you have a choice not to join in."

Sir, all indulgences can lead to positive or negative outcomes, depending on our purposes and on how we balance ourselves at the end of the day. This requires self-responsibility and discipline which we owe to ourselves to cultivate. The story that my grassroots leader related is very similar to the transition that we are going through today with the decision to go ahead with the IR. In the early days, it was resettlement that caused uprooting of livelihood, followed by industrialisation, that led to outcries against pollution. Singapore then had to remake itself in order to survive. The outcry todate is that we should remove all undesirable activities from our people and insulate them. Just like in the 60s, Singaporeans were not too sure then, whether we would make it, in the remaking. But we did.

Sir, Singapore has proven time and time again that it can survive against the odds. Surely we cannot be saying that the social and moral fabric of our nation is so flimsy that the introduction of the IRs is going to cause it to disintegrate. I think not. We are made of stronger stuff. It can be a heart-rending decision for many religious individuals when it comes to having to make a choice on matters of the secular world. But we have to look at the big picture and take a discerning and practical step to do what is best for the future viability of our country. The fundamental point really is for us to be able to continue to upkeep our moral values and exercise self-responsibility and vigilance. Yet at the same time, we must be realistic and understand the need to do what is right for the viability of the country. We will continue to have problems, but we must seek and evolve solutions on our own over time.

Opposition MP Chiam See Tong has said that once we officially plant the seed

Column: 431

of gambling in our soil, it is a question of time that it will grow and spread in our land. My rejoinder is that unless we neglect the regular pruning, our growers will ensure that these plants will be properly cropped and contained and will be the pride of our garden. I am sure that the IR will have to evolve to an icon that we can be proud of.

Often, I meet people and when I tell them that I am from Singapore, they say, "Oh, yes, Singapore, nice airport." Because they do not get beyond Changi Airport. Too often, Singapore is seen as a 24-hour stopover enroute to other cities. We need to change that. We need to cultivate, as the Prime Minister referred to, the X factor. But we also need to cultivate the "wow factor" and the "zap factor". In fact, convention organisers have been lamenting that they often are at a blank as to what else to offer to the top-notch business leaders visiting Singapore. We do not just need to remake Singapore; we need a complete makeover for Singapore! At these crossroads, we have to look for new engines of growth for the economy. Whilst China is now becoming the "factory of the world" and India, the "world's back office", Singapore should remake itself into a global service entertainment hub.

I am of the view that the IRs will not make gambling any more or less prevalent, provided proper regulations and safeguards are put in place. I am comforted by the announcements by MCYS, MHA and MOH of the frameworks that will be put in place to mitigate the social ills and possible abuses that will be posed by the IRs.

Drawing on research from overseas, experience shows that legalising casinos can actually minimise gambling-related problems, because the methods for controlling and treating gambling addictions are developed and well enforced. Often, gambling related problems arise in

Column: 432

societies where gambling is prohibited because it is only too easy to assume that the problem does not exist. What is important is that we have to continuously ensure that the industry will be transparent and strictly regulated by the Government. The IRs will be a clean and well-run business. Singapore's strong governance will ensure that any IR is run like a corporation, hence minimising potential social ills. Also, with our infrastructure and fine-tuned regulatory system, we are likely to attract tenders from only the most professional of IR operations.

One question that arises is how will the Government balance the interests of investors with those of the public. Other countries, including US and Australia, have gaming commissions to regulate the gaming industry. They also have the power to impose penalties if the casino contravenes those regulations. Have we given sufficient thought as to how we will impose and enforce similar controls in Singapore? As hon. Member Mr Tan Soo Khoon observed, the $100 levy may not be sufficient to deter the hardened gamblers. This is why I think we need to distinguish between two categories of casino users.

Firstly, those people who have the occasional flutter but could otherwise conceivably develop an addiction and, secondly, the hardened gamblers. As far as the latter is concerned, disincentives are not necessarily going to wean them away from their addiction. But, then again, nor is the presence or the absence of a casino in Singapore. We need to have in place different strategies to deal with each of these types of casino users.

The revenue from the levies and other forms of funds that may be invested to develop the national framework for public education, as well as to help with gambling addicts, must be put to good use. What NMP Mr Steve Chia has

Column: 433

suggested with regard to supporting the families of the gambling addicts is a sure way of breeding more gambling addicts. Sir, we must ensure that these monies would not be utilised to support a crutch mentality amongst the indulgents and cause them to be irresponsible to their family members. Whilst we need to provide support to the family members of gambling addicts, we must never end up dishing easy money or else it would only fuel their irresponsibility towards their family members. The monies would be better utilised for public education on the ills of gambling and for establishing safeguards for monitoring and auditing of operational practices and processes so as to ensure that we close all the loopholes.

At this point, I would also like to ask the Government whether there has been any survey carried out to determine the average amount spent per person on legalised bets, jackpot machines, Big Sweep, Toto, 4-D and football bets. It is important that we develop and maintain key economic and social statistics so as to monitor the economic benefits and social costs of gambling in Singapore. This will enable us to better address our future strategies in managing the IR industry.

Sir, the IR would be a boost to job creation and our GDP. Indeed, there will be many types of primary jobs that would be created by the development of the IRs. These jobs will range from security guards and croupiers to executives and managers and other professionals. The spin-off jobs would likely be generated in the SMEs because of the economic multiplier effect. This is largely because IRs source many of their services from SME firms.

An issue that has been raised by many Singaporeans is whether there will be sufficient high-end jobs for Singaporeans. Sir, the high-end jobs are likely to be filled by foreigners in view of the fact that

Column: 434

Singapore lacks expertise within the areas of IR and gaming management. However, these skills are transferable and should be taught to Singaporeans sooner. Will the Singapore Government be setting any timeline for these skills to be transferred to Singaporeans? It is important that the selected IR operators will partner the Singapore Government and other training providers in Singapore to train Singaporeans for these jobs. In this, Sentosa Tourism Academy should reach out to the training providers in Singapore and provide the "Train-a-Trainer" kits, so that we will at the same time ensure that there will be sufficient well-equipped and competent training providers in Singapore to train service providers in people skills and managing human resources skills for this sector. I can envisage a vibrant training industry in this sector evolving.

Sir, at the same time, we must also face the challenge of changing the paradigm of Singaporeans with respect to employment within the IR and casino, especially among those who strongly object to the casino. Here, mindset training is crucial, and we should tap on the established training providers on mindset training to partner Sentosa Training Academy on this aspect of training. My worry is that we can bring the horse to the water, but the horse may not drink it and, if this were so, from structural unemployment, we may now be faced with "mindset unemployment" arising from religious and moral objections to working in the IRs with casinos.

In the light of the thousands of jobs that will be created, either directly or indirectly, the issue, as far as many Singaporeans are concerned, is how many unemployed Singaporeans, including retirees, would be able to find employment in this industry. I hope that, at some point, more information will be shared on how the unemployed, including retirees, can be retrained for some of the jobs in the IRs. One segment of the retail line that would be suitable for retirees

Column: 435

would be souvenir shops in the IRs. I propose that a task force be formed to explore further how we can engage retirees who are still strong and healthy for vocations in the retail line in the IRs.

In conclusion, Sir, the debate on the casino in the IRs over these last few months has provided Singapore with a mirror to reflect on what it must do in going forward. It is just like an ageing individual or, if you like, a maturing individual looking into the mirror and realising, "I am not looking fresh and attractive anymore." Here, these two individuals have two choices.

One is to let it be and age graciously and fade away. I remember my maternal grandmother who, according to my mother, started to don black trousers and blue samfoo and bundled her hair when she turned 40, because that was the right thing to do for somebody who was brought up in a very closed and traditional family. When she was 70, she would tell her visitors that she was waiting to die, even though she was in the pink of health. Finally, she died at the age of 90. She was an old grand lady who refused to change with time, and took pride in that. And for a good 50 years, she bowed prematurely to the twilight years of life and without much excitement.

The second choice is to change the hairstyle, colour the lips and cheeks a little bit, so that the individual continues to look fresh and re-energised and send a signal that life is still young and exciting. But that does not mean that we have loose moral values. Sir, the point is that being seasoned does not mean becoming obsolete. Being seasoned can mean growing and venturing. Author T S Eliot said, "Old man [and I qualify, it includes women too] ought to be explorers."

Sir, in going forward, Singapore should have a blast in remaking itself. At the grassroots level, it is such a paradigm

Column: 436

shift that has made line dancing so popular amongst the senior citizens in community centres today and has given the senior citizens a rejuvenation of not only their hopes and their dreams, but their physical and mental well-being. Surely, Sir, Singapore must choose the second choice.

On this note, I urge that we move on and give our

support to the Prime Minister who will have to shoulder this responsibility of remaking Singapore with a blast in having two IRs.

Miss Penny Low (Pasir Ris-Punggol): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, the casino debate has been a very difficult issue that has given me much grey hair.

To be or not to be, that is the question. To put the issue upfront, I am not for gambling. I know of enough gamblers that put their families through turmoils to convince that gambling traps those who cannot discipline themselves and traps their families and friends along with their habit as well. And for the pathological gamblers, it is all of the bad and none of the good.

In my entire life, I think I gambled four times. One was betting on a 4-D out of good fun at a retreat. The number came out but in reverse order. I lost $2. Another was in Las Vegas while I waited for a group of friends who had been delayed last minute. I have been to Las Vegas and casinos many times but never gambled. I have observed casino operations and the punters throughout these visits, but never quite felt the urge to punt. But that time, as I had time to kill, I decided to change US$5 into coins for the one-arm bandits (jackpot machines) just to understand what sets punters' hearts racing and also to keep myself occupied.

I was on the nickel machines, winning about five cents. I kept winning, and losing and winning again. After about

Column: 437

half an hour, I still had money left. Much as I tried, it was not easy to get rid of the US$5 on the nickel machines. It was a little bit boring for me. I got tired and gave up with a nickel and dimes left from the US$5.

The third and fourth time was at the Turf Club during charity races. I was invited in my capacity as Treasurer of the Equestrian Federation of Singapore and at both charity races, President Nathan was the Guest-of-Honour. Betting on horse races was new to me and it was quite complicated. But as it was a charity race and everyone placed their bets, I did so too. During the first charity event, I bet on two races out of 10. I won one, lost the other, it was a net gain. During the second charity event, I understood the game a little better and I bet on four out of 10 of the races. Lady luck was smiling at me and miraculously, I actually won all four bets and collected quite a tidy sum, not bad at all.

But does that make me want to try again? It is a firm "no". Sir, I guess different folks, different strokes. While travelling off the beaten path, hitch-hiking, water sports and perhaps even extreme sports may set my adrenalin rushing, I felt nothing more than a smile at those wins. Of course, I bet small. I am also a timid gambler. I never believe in easy money nor gambling to wealth. There may be short-term wins, but I have never met a gambler who wins in the long term. Even in the movies like " qian wang zhi wang ", " du shen ", God of Gamblers or the Godfather , the protagonists never really wins, but suffered great tragedies instead. I believe in hard work and thrift and hence, whether the casino is on-shore or off-shore, whether I am in a casino or out of a casino, it makes no difference to my basic value system and make-up. I believe that there are many people like me who will not be negatively influenced by the existence of casinos.

Column: 438

Then there is also another group who will gamble anyway, if not here, in Batam, Genting, Macau, Las Vegas and somewhere in the cruise to nowhere. In fact, very soon, they will also be gambling in the virtual cyber-world. We need to help this group better manage themselves.

But the group that I am really concerned with is the in-between who may be attracted by the glitz and greed in the casino, who walk into a casino by chance and get hooked by the casino operator's design. Sir, nobody goes to a casino, expecting to lose money, but they end up losing. Most people only wanted to try their luck once or twice but they could not leave thereafter. This is, in fact, how Chia Teck Leng got hooked. Let me quote Chia:

"I started gambling in casinos in 1994. It started innocuously enough. I was simply passing time on board a cruise ship on a lazy afternoon. By pure chance, I had walked into its only casino, to be accosted by alluring colourful lights, attractive croupiers and the magical promise of easy money€¦ Just when I was wallowing in the glamour and triumph of my new found wealth, tragedy struck. I completely lost my footing. I made a goodbye tape in the event. At the point when I was arrested, I was purportedly the second biggest casino gambler in the world."

As we know, he cheated banks of $117 million and has been sentenced behind bars for 42 years.

I am sure that we will never endeavour a Singaporean to be the number one gambler in the world. The question is: how many Chia Teck Lengs will there be and how many mini-Chias can our society handle? If the gambling problem can be confined to himself or herself, then the problem is containable. The truth is that for every gambler, there is at least one family and a social network that is negatively affected.

According to the MCYS' survey, this may be translated to 2.1% or 55,000

Column: 439

gamblers. In other words, even without the casino, we have at least 55,000 affected families or at least 200,000 people or so negatively affected by the gambling ills. This is no small problem. What more with the casino next door operating 24/7 round the clock? Sir, one family affected is one family too many. There is cost on both the social front and the economic front that cannot be ignored.

Last Monday, a 60-year-old resident came to my MPS for the 19th time. Her plea: early withdrawal of her remaining CPF. Her reason: her son had borrowed from the loan sharks and has gone mad from the pressure. He is now, in fact, at the Institute of Mental Health. She is left to carry the burden of repayment and she sobs each time she comes. But over the 19 times that I hear her, I realised that much of the money owed were gambling debts - hers and her son's. Chances are that she is probably still at it.

I shiver to think what might happen to her and many others come 2009. More will come to ask for early withdrawal of CPF. More 55-year-olds who just withdraw their CPF money may also be found at the gambling tables and jackpot machines. This is worrisome as we already face a looming retirement funding issue. Yet, in every MPS, there are people who come to seek help to defer payment of arrears and ask for jobs. In fact, they make up the majority. For every gambling case, there are at least 15-20 cases of job-seekers and payment problems. With no job and many bills to pay, families face hardship and can be a social problem. That is the reality and the dilemma that we face.

Sir, when the debate first started, it looks like a case of economic value versus social values and appears to be a case of which value is more important to us as a society. Frankly, I would rather have a first-class society and live a simpler life

Column: 440

than a first-class economy with third class society.

Those who are against asked: what price economic development? Those who are pro said that gambling is already prevalent and we need to bring back some lost revenue and create more economic avenues at the same time. So who is right or wrong? Through this, no one is right or wrong. It is a judgement call which verdict can only be known in retrospect. What is certain, however, is that this is no easy or hasty decision but one that has been deliberated and decided on by tough minds and warm hearts, all working towards ensuring jobs for Singaporeans and a better living.

Obviously, without a robust economy and a face lift for the landscape of Singapore, many businesses would scout around the region for a lower cost hub that also boasts of good infrastructure and city buzz.

A robust economy and jobs for everyone is critical to Singapore's survival. We have positioned ourselves well in the region and international arena. But we are past the era of a sleepy neighbourhood. In fact, our nearest neighbours are already giving us a run for our money, as India and the China dragon awaken at the same time.

In the last two years, I met many young and successful entrepreneurs from the region who are part of the network called "The New Asian Leaders". They are all under 40 years old and run successful multi-million businesses. When asked if they have been to Singapore, they said "yes". When asked if they would think of expanding to Singapore, the majority said no. Singapore is not on their radar screen, whether for market size reasons, cost factors or competitive reasons. It got me worried.

For a long time, we are a preferred destination. But for this group who will

Column: 441

continue to grow and will become important movers and shakers in the new economy, Singapore is not on their radar screen. I think we need to seriously remake ourselves economically in order to keep our economy humming and bring jobs to the people. The IRs will bring a potential 35,000 jobs and indeed, like Mr Lim Boon Heng said, it is a number that is difficult to ignore.

As the debate progresses, I realise that there is more to the argument of economics versus social benefits equation that meets the eye. It is not just about which value we treasure more. It is about the tone that we want to set for the Singapore society at large. The tone we want to set for our society is in fact the issue that I grapple with a lot.

For decades, we have said no to casino because we do not want to change the ethos and values in our society, which is honest living through thrift and hard work. We wanted to protect our citizens from the negative influences of vices like organised crimes and gambling which erode our ethos. We make sure that they do not enter our shores. Hence, saying "no" to casino was a no-brainer.

Yet, on 18th April 2005, we relented and said "yes". Is it because this generation of leaders have met with unprecedented challenges and gone soft? Are we seeking the easy way out? Is the decision to reap easy profit based on pure economic reasons alone? Or is this what the majority of our people want? But are our people mature enough to decide on such issues which circumstances and information may not be available to them?

In retrospect, this is the critical point for the decision-making. And this is a critical difference between 40 years ago and now. Some 40-50 years ago, information was scarce and so was overseas

Column: 442

travel. Anything which was not on-shore almost had little or no influence on the lives and paradigms of our people. Then, people needed to focus on basic bread-and-butter and all that they know would have a high correlation of what the Government wanted them to know.

Today, the equation is different. There are cable TV, Internet and, of course, the frequent travels that expose Singaporeans to different people, lifestyles, priorities and viewpoints. The Government no longer has a monopoly on his mindset. If a desired lifestyle cannot be found here, many are educated enough and in sufficient demand in the region or the world to uproot and move with their feet.

In that sense, we must offer sufficient space for the individuals to dream their dreams and live the lives that they so desire. Indeed, Singapore and her people have matured well, especially in the last few years. The very challenging circumstances like the discovery of the Jemaah Islamiyah terrorist cell groups in Singapore, the once fiery water and cross-straits issues, SARS, bird flu and, more recently, our reaction to the tsunami disaster, all demonstrate a good degree of resilience and maturing of our society at large.

Collectively, we have proven to be a cool-headed people with a community spirit with a good sense of emergency and positive action to match. We are, after all, 40 years old and it is time to trust our people, have confidence in our people and let them decide. So I set out, at every occasion, when I meet with my residents and grassroots leaders, asking them for their opinion, conducting straw polls on the casino issue. The latest was done on Sunday, 17th April,

and there was an overwhelming number of pro-IR residents. Of course, this is also borne out by the recent newspaper articles. The question is: can they take care of themselves and be disciplined? I think certainly not all

Column: 443

can. But is this what they want? For the majority, yes. Well, then I say, "The ayes have it, the ayes have it."

The IR sets a new tone for society. It is a tone that is more open, one where we trust our people to make the decision for themselves and, therefore, one that expects also responsibility from the people as more choices are put in front of them.

Moving on now to some practical concerns. Sir, the proposals from the two IRs come from world-class players. These are mega gaming boys with international network and clients from all walks of life. Within every IR, there is also a complex eco-system of casino operators, junkets, sharks and thugs, and an unseen financial system that oils the machinery. To tighten the reins and choke the engine may bring an early end to the ventures. To allow the eco-system to grow would negatively impact our ethos. It will not be an easy balance or, even possible, to keep out the bad altogether. World-class IRs will attract world-class organised crimes which are sophisticated. The question is: do you have sufficient tools to deal with them? How far would we go in dealing with them? I would appreciate further clarification on our defence mechanism.

On the other safeguards to be introduced, my sense is that casino operators would also come out with counter-measures to beat them. These are big players with extensive experience in human psychology in attracting punters. In fact, they hire Ivy League professors to design game floor and lure curious onlookers.

Let me give some examples. First, the slot machines, and this goes back to my second experience at gambling at the slot machine with the US$5. It was not that I was lucky that I kept winning, but rather because these are five-cent machines and I was the free labour. How does it work?

Column: 444

Basically, the casinos are designed in such a way that they will try to generate as much noise and buzz, as possible, to passers-by. So, at the fringe of it would be the cheap slot machines - one cent, five cents, and so on. The idea is not for them to lose their money, but for them to create all the ringing sound of money dropping from the slot machines. Then as one progresses inwards, towards the core of the casino, there would then be the 25-cents, the 50-cents, $1, $10 and, of course, ultimately at the core would be the gambling tables. That is the psychology.

Another example. A particular casino operator has come out with a card called the "winner's card". In this winner's card, what they do is to track the identity of the punter with the life-time economic value calculated. Whenever the punter comes to the casino and puts it into the slot machine or their own booth, it would send information through the central computer system to tell and track the winnings or losses of the punter. If they found that the punter is losing quite a bit of money, someone would turn up out of the blue and ask, "Sir or Madam, are you having a good game? Would you like some free vouchers for the theatres, hotels or F&B?" Therefore, the guy goes back happy losing, not knowing that his economic life value is being tracked there.

There are many such examples, but I would like to move on to also voice another concern I have. I am especially concerned about the notion of normalising gambling, especially amongst children. In recent years, children are getting into the betting scenarios, especially with soccer betting. But that is once in four years, or when the World Cup happens. But, maybe they are doing it more now. And with the casino would we further normalise it? I am not sure. But I think what we must do is to strengthen the core values and basic family units that our society stands for and, in fact, to also

Column: 445

strengthen our financial planning principles so that we can be very clear what can be gambled away and what cannot be put on the betting table.

Sir, in all, I think our people have spoken and so did the Cabinet. I reckon that, to be or not to be, was the question. Now that the decision has been made, we need to put our bets on Prime Minister Lee, who has unequivocally assumed the ultimate responsibility of the decision and win big. Be in the winner's circle as a united people. We need to rally behind the decision and make it a success. While PM bears the ultimate responsibility, people must share in the responsibility to make Singapore a success. After all, as the Chinese saying goes, " guo jia xing wang, pi fu you ze ".

A successful IR will certainly reap economic benefits which may be re-channelled to treat social ills and promote community strength, while a failed IR would leave us with all the social ills and negative economic equity. We have to get past this stage and focus on the objectives of this landmark decision, which is to transform not just the facade of Singapore, but also the core of Singapore, to inject life, responsibility, self and mutual help of the individual and the community. All eyes are on the IR now and I certainly hope that the IR or the casino will not become the only icon of Singapore. I think we need to complete the painting of our economic and social landscape on the canvas. We need a fuller picture of where we are going tomorrow. May I call on the people to support the Cabinet's decision so that we may move forward together and also on the Cabinet to complete the painting of Singapore's social, physical and economic landscape on the canvas so that our people can track the same path with the Cabinet as one united people.

Column: 446

Mr Andy Gan Lai Chiang (Marine Parade): Sir, after viewing the various proposals submitted by well-known resort operators for the proposed integrated resort at Marina Bayfront and Sentosa, I was impressed by the confidence that investors have in our country, and it made me see the economic benefits that could radiate from this massive project from a different perspective. I have begun to view this project not as a dedicated gaming house but a sight that may position Singapore as a country that has the influence and capacity to reach out to the rest of the world, notwithstanding its limited land size. Before viewing this, I had a very sceptical impression of such a resort, built upon my impression of how Las Vegas casinos started off, and how it subsequently took on a disguised image of a family-destination successfully drawing in the crowds despite being located in desert country.

Personally, I am not in favour of promoting the setting up of a casino in Singapore, in spite of it occupying a small area in the proposed integrated resort, as the ill effects of a casino, apart from the evils of gambling, are well-known. Furthermore, a casino gives a sleazy image to a country that has built its foundation on hard work and with a clean, honest and efficient Government leading it. Many of my colleagues in this House have given examples of how bad the effects of gambling have on people, and I agree with them. We should then try to reach out to as many as possible and inform them not to be lured by the hope of winning big in gambling. The social ills of casino have a tendency of passing through the walls that are supposed to trap the on-goings of casinos within and, if not carefully managed, will creep into the social fabric of our nation, changing the good values cultivated over the years and which has helped bind our different communities together.

The danger of casinos causing a subculture to develop and controlling the

Column: 447

behaviour and thinking of the people and advocating all that the casino offers are something which Singapore as a small country will have to be aware of. As we live in a compact society, it would be difficult for one not to influence the other and, subsequently, collectively let our guards down to the ill effects of such an industry.

As we cannot live in a glass bubble, we must then guard ourselves against undesirable values of the casino which are not conducive to good social values. However, as I have stated earlier, other aspects of the IR cannot be ignored and will need to be recognised especially for its economic values. It has the potential to attract the rest of the world to us and to bring Singapore to the level of other major cities of the world. It has been demonstrated that the operators of the IR has the range of soft capabilities to draw on visitors to Singapore, allowing the latest attraction in entertainment, be it music, film or concerts and other conferences to be staged here. Such a magnetic pull will be important to Singapore as many other countries in the region are also trying to be such a place.

I support the Prime Minister's decision in having the IR for Singapore, as it would create not only more jobs in a big way, but also lift the level of excitement in business circles and introduce new activities for families to enjoy, as in the theme parks. All these and world-class events have been missing since our early history. However, I will, on the other hand, not support any decision to allow the proliferation of casinos beyond what has been committed. We have to be sensitive to the feelings of those who are opposed to gambling, and the Government must gauge the sentiment of the people very carefully, especially when the country is moving towards a more open society. I know it must have been a most difficult decision for the Prime Minister to make to allow the IR to house the casino.

Column: 448

But now that the decision has been made, we must all rally around him and make a success of the IR. The care and intensity that the Government has placed on this subject has shown that it will deal with the future social problems arising from gambling with great concern.

From my discussion with my grassroots leaders on the casino issue, I have the impression that many do not have the correct knowledge of what an IR is made up of. Some still have the impression that the IR looks like a big casino building. Others see it as a row of huge hotel buildings fronting the waterfront, imposing itself on other smaller buildings currently standing in the vicinity of the proposed sites, especially the Sentosa site. Their thoughts are not far from how casinos and resorts look like compared to the images that they have seen over TV and in the papers, who in turn have used pictures of other casinos and resorts in their reports. In contrast, the IR concepts that I have seen are not only futuristic in design, but also conjure a sense of confidence. Surprisingly, it also blends well with the surrounding landscape with hardly any images of a casino on the exterior. So, I would like to urge the Government to consider revealing as soon as possible some images of what the two IRs will, or may look like, so that the casino's images do not get entrenched itself in the public's mind. This will then help the public to concentrate on the positive effects of what the IRs can bring.

If an IR with a casino is the way to go for Singapore to succeed in competing with the rest of the countries in the region, then we must be prepared to live with the ill effects that it will bring. The lure of big monies through games of chance and its social problems will surely permeate into the population. Thus, new measures must be in place to curb as far as possible all ill effects of the casino. Our legal system and police force must be equipped with the powers to prevent

Column: 449

related crimes and money laundering from spreading. The local residents must be shielded from the lure of bright lights of the gaming halls

and entry barriers reviewed regularly to restrict the tempting urge to enter the gates of the casino. Our religious and community groups must improve their moral teaching methods to instil good values to the young and old, so that they will be able to withstand the temptations before them and be able to make the right choices for themselves.

Sir, allow me to digress slightly from the problems of gambling to an observation on transport matters that I feel may cause some irritation to visitors and locals patronising the future IRs. As the two IRs will be located in the south of Singapore and within a few minutes' drive of each other, road congestion will surely be the order of the day. Already the Marina South highway and the roads leading to Sentosa are seeing traffic jams now and then. What more will we see when the two IRs come up? I hope the Ministry of Transport will make a thorough study of the networks of roads leading to the IRs as the volume of traffic will surely increase on a daily basis and will be worse when functions and conventions are being hosted.

Similarly, healthcare cases of pathological gamblers will also increase. Every day, we are faced with addictions in many forms, such as drug addiction and other immoral addictions. Gambling addiction will add to the increase in the number of addicts. Here, I am assured by the Minister for Health that the Health Ministry will be prepared to handle increased problems in this area. Research will have to be updated and immediate action put in place which, unfortunately, will lead to an increase in healthcare expenditure.

Sir, our nation has to move on with the times to be economically successful. At

Column: 450

the same time, we are subjected to all sorts of new temptations daily, sometimes moving us to do things which are against our best moral judgement. We must be prepared as a society to find ways to keep our social values deeply rooted so that come what may, we are still the best country to live in. The different races living together and working together can continue to do so as long as we keep our work ethics intact and the belief that economic success comes from hard work and strong family values.

Mrs Yu-Foo Yee Shoon: ( In Mandarin ): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, for the past few days, we have listened to many different voices. I feel that the Government's decision to allow the opening of IRs with casinos is a very important one. I look at this problem in a wider perspective. If we do not have Minister George Yeo's suggestion, we may not have that durian in place today, and we may not have this debate today. I would like to thank him for his two durians and also for this platform to debate on the matter of casino in Singapore.

We have to respect the different voices to prevent and stop extreme gambling. First, we must admit that it is a fact that not everybody would have the same opinion and the same voice. Among Singaporeans, there are some who are staunchly against the setting up of casinos. We respect their opinions and we actually listen to their voices. Because we have these pillars in these fast-moving streams, they help us to hold to our value system in our society.

Now, let us listen to different voices and also the different opinions about the IRs. You may have heard about them in the past few days. I think it is worth the while listening to them again. Of course, there is no right or wrong in these opinions. There are some people who actually feel it is all right to gamble on football but object to IRs because of the casino component. Some go to the turf

Column: 451

club for horse betting but they are staunchly against the casino. There is a Japanese businessman who told me that in a golf course you can actually lose or win thousands of dollars but the golfers still do not support the opening of casinos. Some people worry that our reputation of an honest, clean, serious, hardworking attitude and value system will collapse and we will have a society filled with all types of undesirable people and things. Of course, there are those who worry about the social problems that may be brought about by the opening of the casino with the rise in drug-trafficking, prostitution, loan sharks and organised crimes. Some are afraid that Singaporeans may become compulsive gamblers and the percentage will increase from the present 2.1% and jump manifold. Thus, the society has to pay much more for this.

A very close friend of mine told me that she opposed the establishment of integrated resorts with casinos. She feels that everybody is drunk, and she is the only one who is sober. I am not sure if I am one of those who are drunk or I am sober. Of course, there are many people who presume or do not really know that a lot of Singaporeans are already gambling. Some people agree to the IR but are against the casino. Some people doubt if this will really bring about good and new jobs for our people. Some people actually oppose it because of their religion or political standpoints. At the same time, we also hear another voice - a very loud voice.

A few days ago, a colleague in Parliament told me that his women's group fully supports this and they want the Government to set this up as soon as possible. This is because a lot of Singaporeans already go to cruise ships or overseas to gamble. So, there is a huge amount of money flowing out of Singapore. Rather than letting the money flow out, why do we not just let the money remain in Singapore?

Column: 452

Of course, there are people who cannot wait for this project to be completed, so that they do not have to take a boat or bus to Batam or Macau, etc, to gamble. And there are some business people who hope that this project will bring about more opportunities that will boost the tourism services or the property sector.

Some foreign businessmen also told me that they felt that this is a new way to let Singapore reinvent itself. However, there are also some intellectuals who feel that a little gambling is good for the temperament. And this is perhaps why the Chinese people like to gamble. MCYS actually pointed out that a lot of people feel that gambling is a social activity. To them, to have this IR with a casino is just one more place for them to spend their leisure time. There is another voice, which is also a very loud voice, that a little gambling is a way to buy hope. There is another group of people who feel that gambling can make them rich, and these are the people who are most likely to become gambling addicts. However, there are some who say that when they were studying overseas, they have seen students gambling away their tuition fees. But a lot of them actually still work hard and come back with a degree. They have seen all types of IRs with casinos and are well exposed. So they do not think that this is a big problem.

There are others who feel that Singapore has already developed into a mature society, and Singaporeans can think independently and they do not need the Government to "mother" them around. So, they feel that they have to be responsible for their own activities. Others feel that this could be a project that will bring about new job opportunities for the older and low-skilled Singaporeans. For this, I personally feel that this project could bring us new jobs but we have to retrain our workers, particularly the older workers, so that they can take on these new jobs. I have come across many older

Column: 453

workers who try very hard to learn how to operate new machines to clean the floor. It seems that there is no other way. For these older and low-skilled people, I feel that it is a very good opportunity. Some people feel that this could bring about more tax income for Singapore. This is what I hear from our vice-chairperson. For this increase in tax income, it can actually help to tackle the aging problem where health is concerned.

From these supporting or opposing voices, we have to weigh the positive and the negative effects, and make a good decision, to see which decision will impact our economy and our people in the long run. We have to look at the problem positively. We have to use education through the masses to ensure that our society will be protected, and through legal ways to lower the impact that it could bring.

This debate serves to educate not only the future gamblers but also the present gamblers and the people of Singapore in general. My Ministry will start this educational process as soon as possible. We are not going to wait until the casino is set up before we start educating Singaporeans. We are going to start now. The Government will use all its resources through multi-Ministerial cooperation and strategies to help prevent and halt excessive gambling. This should be done through the three Ministries - Home Affairs, MCYS and Health - to set up a safety net to make sure that Singaporeans will not be lured into pathological gambling and give rise to family and social problems. Of course, we cannot totally avoid all these problems. Our well-known so-called "Home Team" led by Minister Wong Kan Seng can curb the problem of loan sharks.

We have to transmit the right values to our people through our education system, the media, the religious

Column: 454

organisations and the VWOs. These will include honesty, hard work and other values. The confession of Mr Chia Teck Leng, who is serving his prison sentence for fraud resulting from compulsive gambling, is a very good material for public education.

Some people think that Singapore is a piece of clean land. If we build a casino, it will increase gambling many times. But, of course, we have to realise that gambling has been in Singapore all along. If we look at the MCYS' report, where gambling is concerned, Singapore is not losing out to Hong Kong or Macau. Singaporeans buy Toto, 4-D, gamble on football, and many even put their bets with illegal operators. They go to Batam and Genting. If you look at Jack Neo's movie, Tu Ran Fa Cai , ie, getting rich suddenly, you can see that during the weekends in the void decks, there are a lot of people gambling. So if you want to help these people, we have to choose a bigger way. A lot of people gamble and they do it socially. Only 2.1% have a problem. And, of course, what we are concerned with is especially this group of people. We know that most Singaporeans are mature and they know how to look after themselves, and are responsible to their family and society. The person who is in charge of Cosner also points out that in America, as long as you actually keep a cap on gambling, we can avoid excessive gambling. In fact, if you look at all those gamblers, they are not that many. Of course, we have to have the risk-taking attitude to cultivate good entrepreneurial spirit. This is good for them, good for the country and it helps to start their own businesses.

In setting up the IR with casino, is it going to make Singapore a third-class city? Let us look at Melbourne in Australia. Since 1861, every year in November, they have the Melbourne Cup. It is just like a carnival. There are men and women who dress themselves up and

Column: 455

they wear beautiful hats. They have a price for the best dressed person, etc. If you look at this horse betting, it is not the focal point, but a place or occasion for the whole family to have a carnival. Last year, I went to Vancouver. Along the two hours' journey from Vancouver to Seattle, there are six different casinos. If you look at these two cities, Melbourne and Vancouver, they are among the best choice cities to live in the whole world. They are ranked among the first few choice cities in the world. Another place is Monaco. It is a country which is smaller than Singapore and it has the very well known Monte Carlo casino.

Whether Singapore will degenerate into a third class society will depend on whether the Government knows how to regulate the operation of the casino and pull the stops whenever necessary. In the 80s, when I was in the NTUC, we had the same problem of whether or not we should have the jackpot machines at our NTUC Club. If not for these jackpot machines, we would have closed down long ago. Of course, we had to have a lot of money to set up all the different activities. At that time, the late Mr Ong Teng Cheong advised us to understand why these people gamble. Most of these workers who go to the Club gamble only on small amounts. He said, "Well, if they want to gamble, why don't we let them gamble the money here?" So we can use this money to have other activities like sponsoring an orchestra to perform at various venues and raise funds for the various activities.

These jackpot machines actually bring in the funds we need. Mr Ong Teng Cheong said that we must make sure that those people who sat there playing the jackpot machines for too long, we must ask them to go home. We must not make gambling become too excessive. If we compare this to the NTUC Clubs, this is quite similar. The strategy is similar. If we want to have large-scale international activities or cultural activities, and we do

Column: 456

not have the money, how are we going to have all these activities? With these IRs, they look at the needs of the society. If we do not want to look at what the society needs, then it is difficult to have an IR and maintain it. Furthermore, the Ministers have already mentioned about helping older people to adapt to the new skills. So I will not talk about this again. This project will bring more job opportunities. We must train our low-skilled older workers to upgrade themselves in order to take on these new jobs. This will bring about more goodwill in the family. With the setting up of IRs, the unemployed workers and retrenched middle management executives alike will have better chances to get a new job. So they can continue to work, save their Medisave and not depend on the children. If you look at China, India opening up with their middle class expanding, we hope that with these two IRs, we will improve our tourism and bring about more opportunities in other areas and sectors.

Now, I would like to look at the long term prospect: what are the IRs going to bring to the Singapore economy? There are people who ask: is there no other way? Must we take the casino way? Of course, what we are taking now is a multi-pronged approach. We have free trade, transport, medical science, and tourism is just one part of it. As Minister Lim Hng Kiang puts it, we are sowing the seed with the hope that it would grow into a big tree. It is also like a little flame. We hope this flame will burn into a much bigger ball of fire and bring about much more vitality, for example, recreation, hospitality, retail, etc. This will make Singapore alive again. I hope that we put in as much passion into the other parts of this IR, not only on the casino.

When we talk about entertainment, it can bring about the reinventing of Singapore. In the 90s, when the Shanghai Pudong area started reinventing itself, I visited the place and I really feared that

Column: 457

Singapore would become a second class city compared to Pudong. Every time when I go to New York, London, Shanghai or Hong Kong, I could feel the vitality of these cities. I asked myself, "Are we going to be like a shooting star that just shoots through very briefly?" Last year, I went to Detroit. It used to be a very famous town for automobiles. Now it is a dead city. I went to Yangzhou which was well known in the past with a lot of historical happenings. But now, Shanghai is the place where most people want to be, and not Yangzhou. Yangzhou has become a second or third class city, and Shanghai has jumped to the top.

When our foreign friends talk about Singapore, they always say that it is a very clean and beautiful city and it has a very clean and honest government. These are advantages. We should not let these pass us. At the same time, with all these international places, have you heard anyone say that Singapore is a fun place? A lot of people say that Singapore is boring and full of man-made things. As advocated by Dr Geh Min, we must have a lot of cultural activities here. We have to get Singaporeans start all these activities and take in all the international cultures. For example, I went to Kunming for a meeting. During the half-day break, I visited the Tourism Board there. Because I spoke Mandarin, we got on very well. I asked the official there, "What is Singapore to you? Is there anything that will attract you?" He said, "Singapore has lost its attractiveness. If I want to go shopping, I will go to Hong Kong. If I want to eat nice food, I can go to Bangkok." So this came from Kunming. It is not even from Shanghai or Beijing. Kunming is only a second class city in China. So I feel that to build an IR with a casino will help to make Singapore into a world-class city with vitality. We have to look further ahead, and spread the flame far and wide. I hope that it will be able to

Column: 458

inject new dynamism into our economy and people.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, three years ago, I saw something known as the WOW Singapore idea. This graceful cultural activity is a new culture. It does not mean that we must discard our old culture. It must be based on the existing foundation to flourish and play up the other cultural characteristics that we have from all over the world. Of course, the project to have an IR is one part of our new culture. We do not depend entirely on this for our civilisation. We must use Singapore as the crossroad between the East and the West and as a multi-racial, multi-religious country, we have all kinds of features from all over the world. Some people suggested that we must have some art galleries in Orchard Road so that they can see the cultural displays along Orchard Road. There is the lighting up of Orchard Road. In the Marina Bay, we have a graceful artistic kind of lighting system. It is like the Bund of Shanghai.

Some three years ago, when I talked about WOW, I praised the lighting system in front of the Fullerton Building. This is the best that we can see in Singapore so far. The Singapore River bank and other places can also match those in Hong Kong. We must allow people to put on neon lights to brighten our city and places of interest. This should not be considered as unhealthy. I suggest that we have a competition for the lighting system so that our country becomes more beautiful and attractive at night. If you go to Shanghai and Hong Kong, if the lights are not turned on, you do not see anything at all. It is very important. Mr Goh Choon Kang already commented on this. I hope he would not say that we are wasting our electricity.

We have to rebuild Singapore and reinvent Singapore with all kinds of attractions so that we can bring in the crowd, visitors and human dynamism and

Column: 459

night life. I hope that StarHub will be able to attract investors from other countries to Singapore. It can be the crossroad or meeting place for the western and eastern cultures and arts. I hope that world class sporting activities, cultural and artistic activities can be conducted here in Singapore. We should also have our Tiger Beer festival to drink beer. I have been to Cambodia to take part in a certain activity. It was not too bad. Why? Because one evening I was taken on a night visit and they said it was Tiger Street. It is a beer street. It is inconceivable that our Singapore brand name of Tiger Street can be hosted in Cambodia. Why can we not do the same in Singapore?

In Yunnan, there are all kinds of flower exhibitions. Why can we not do the same since we are a garden city in the world? We believe that we have a lot of orchids that we can use for cultural or floral festivals which should be well known in the world. We can have a lot of things. We also have a mega exhibition of tropical fishes. We are the second biggest exporter of tropical fishes in the world. Why can we not have a similar kind of competition and exhibition in Singapore? We have been to the great cities in the world, Shanghai, Bangkok, Melbourne, Toronto and so on. Apart from a lot of high class entertainment centres, they have the Victoria Market, and Sydney has Fisherman's Market and Beijing has the Fisherman Port, and you also have such places in Shanghai. So I hope that when we are promoting our high class and mega scale exhibitions, we should have, for example, a Little India or Chinatown, to explore the characteristics that we have inherited from different types of culture, so that we will have a lot of world-class possibilities and potentials. When we explore this kind of mega-projects, we must not forget our cultural heritage. One Italian friend told me he wanted to set up an Italian restaurant and he spent a lot of money to bring a few gondolas to

Column: 460

Singapore. Actually, he wanted to ply the Singapore River. But our officials did not agree to this. They disapproved this project because gondolas cannot be compared with our tongkangs in the Singapore River. It is not allowed. Between China and Japan, you have historical baggage. But, in Singapore, we can absorb all kinds of foreign talents, foreign restaurateurs and other cultures. So, we have everything from the world. Germans have the beer festival, and the Japanese can also have the best restaurants in Singapore.

Sir, I hope that after this debate, we will be able to focus on how to reinvent Singapore so that we can cherish this kind of sentiment and passion, and we will be able to succeed in a big way.

Mr Ong Ah Heng (Nee Soon Central): ( In Mandarin ): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I support the proposal to build integrated resorts with a casino in Singapore. I can feel the pain of the unemployed people. These IRs, with a casino, will be able to create 35,000 jobs. So, how can I fail to support this kind of proposal? Losing a job is not the fault of the workers. They were born into poor families, so they were not able to receive a higher education for better skills to enable them to secure good jobs. They are part of our country. They have a family and children to feed. Although the opening of casinos may cause the breaking up of some families and create some social problems, this is the result of inveterate gambling. So, it has nothing to do with the majority of our workers. It is not something that can really be controlled by the Government. The most important thing is that a lot of our workers are unemployed for a long time.

Sir, I entirely agree with Minister Vivian Balakrishnan that gambling is already prevalent in Singapore. But it does not mean that every gambler will go into a frenzy. Most people do not get into problem with gambling. I understand

Column: 461

from my constituents that there are two Toto draws a week, three 4-D draws a week, one Big Sweep draw every month, and horse racing two to three times a week. In addition, we have also football matches where you can place your bets on almost every day. Yes, we have all kinds of legalised gambling going on in Singapore already.

Some of my constituents told me that they can go to Batam and enjoy a free boat ride. They can go there every day. They say that a lot of housewives wait for their husbands to go to work and then they would go to Batam to gamble, and come back in the afternoon ahead of their husbands. So, nobody knows that these women had been to Batam. Recently, for more than a month, there were some problems that caused the closure of casinos in Batam. People told me that we can gamble every day in Singapore. The question is whether you want to gamble and have the money to gamble. Gambling is going on every day right here in Singapore. You can play mahjong. Yes, it is a healthy pastime for many. At our void decks, we have senior citizens playing card games. They have nothing to do, so they entertain themselves this way. We have all kinds of gambling going on right in front of us, day and night. As shown in the survey done by MCYS, 2.1% of these inveterate gamblers can go underground and gamble, if there is no proper channel for them to gamble.

Some old people told me, "Wherever you have Chinese, you have gambling." This is what the senior people told me. Since we have all kinds of gambling going on right here, can we say that our social ethos have already degenerated? Have our morals also gone down the drain though we are still maintaining the image of being a very clean, moral and honest Government? We are still getting praises, world acclaim for our image as a clean

Column: 462

and organised society. Gambling is going on not only in Singapore but everywhere in the world. The question is: how do we control the ill effects of gambling? Since gambling is so prevalent, then the ills that gambling brings are just small little problems in our society.

Having heard Minister Wong Kan Seng, Minister Khaw Boon Wan and Minister Vivian Balakrishnan, they have already agreed to set up a safety net in our society. I would not be as pessimistic as those anti-gambling people. I can judge from the Ministers' speeches that the social problems created by gambling will not have a very great impact on us. They are still within control of our social network.

The Shin Min Daily News interviewed some people for their views on the setting up of casinos, and one of them, a 30-year-old lady answered, "Will the opening of a casino lead to bad social ethos and affect our younger children? I think it depends on the examples set by their parents. If we teach and educate our children the correct and right values and inculcate these in them properly, then there is no need to worry." A 25-year-old graduate said, "Unexpectedly, there are two, not one, IRs to be built, but I believe that these two IRs will inject more dynamism into Singapore and will create more jobs for Singapore. As for the social ills brought about by gambling, I think we are mature enough to control such ills." These two persons interviewed by the Shin Min Daily News represent our new generation of people. If there are more young Singaporeans who think like these two persons I have quoted, together with our effective measures to control the ills of gambling and the protective safety net, then the casino will not bring about very serious problems in Singapore. I think it will be very minimal. Of course, gambling is bad. But to some other people, it brings a light of hope.

Column: 463

Sir, one morning, I went to the dry market at Blk 761 to meet my constituents. I met one familiar face. She had just come out from a Singapore Pools betting centre. I asked her, "You buy 4-D too?" She said, "Yes. You buy, then you have some hope. Otherwise, what hope do the poor people have?" A lot of people in the lower income group are poor but their ambition is still there. They do not blame the Government. They do not blame anybody. They accept their fate. But they hope that they will one day strike the first prize in the Toto draw so that they can provide a better life for their children.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I will never oppose gambling, because I know gambling will give some people some hope and the hope to survive. Big gambling is bad, but small gambling will certainly give some hope to some people.

Sir, MM Lee told us that if we continue to remain as the safest, cleanest and the most efficient country or city in the world, then Singapore will miss the opportunities created in the new world. SM Goh also mentioned that if we do not do anything now, we will be bypassed in no time. So, the question is: do we want to seize the opportunities as they come along, or do we want to let others bypass us, and fall behind them?

Sir, Deng Xiaoping's opening up of China and his reforms have already transformed China. MOS Mrs Yu-Foo went to Shanghai recently and she was very impressed by the spectacular developments in Shanghai. But we know that the Chinese have already paid a very high social cost. Do you know how much they have paid socially? After Prime Minister Lee announced the setting up of two IRs in Singapore, and I went to the coffeeshops in my constituency, everybody put up their thumbs and said "Good". Is it because they are gamblers? Is it because they are addicted gamblers? It is because they do not want the

Column: 464

opportunities to bypass us, because these are the people who are lagging behind the rest of the society, so they will have hope from the casinos. They believe that the future generation, their children and grandchildren will benefit from this project.

Sir, when Deng Xiaoping advocated opening up and transforming China, he had not met with any opposition. Even if there was, he would have succeeded anyway. So, I would appeal to everybody to put away their differences and give full support to the decision of the Prime Minister. Even in the dark, we are just like a small boat sailing in the darkness. No matter how much time we have to traverse the ocean, after the darkness phase, we will see the dawn of light. We cannot be travelling forever, 24 hours a day, in darkness. The time of dawn will come.

Sir, I fully support the Prime Minister's proposal.

Mdm Cynthia Phua (Aljunied): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, the question of having a casino in Singapore has been well

debated in and outside of Parliament and including my home. My husband and I had stood on the opposite position until the details of the resort concept were disclosed.

I just want to state my position on the casino. To do so, I would like to share a little of our arguments at home. There were strong religious objections to contrast against a backdrop of supportive reasons that were based on economic values. In our humble opinion, we perceive these arguments from two platforms: one from a secular standpoint and the other from a divine or religious perspective. For me and my family, on the religious perspective based on our faith as Catholic Christians, it would compel us to stand against the setting up of the casino within the shores of Singapore. However, there is a need to understand that we are living in a secular community of diverse

Column: 465

religions and backgrounds. The arguments for or against the casino must therefore also take on a secular and national perspective on the economics and future of Singapore. Our argument at home ends in this manner. For the religious within us, we quote from the Bible, "The human mind plans the way, but the Lord directs the steps." Let us then allow the "human minds" do our part for the society. For that, I would support the move to set up an integrated resort and casino.

My reasons are straightforward. It is a question of economics. It is about creating jobs for Singaporeans, not 1,000, 2,000 but 35,000 jobs. There is more than the jobs: the spin-offs from the integrated resorts, world-class architecture and design, development and construction activities, real estate market and values, retail opportunities, services, hotels, food and entertainment, trade expositions, exhibitions, recreational activities, night life, spending and its multiplier effects, and many others to follow. The economic spin-offs are immense.

Yes, I am equally concerned with some of the negative impact from gambling addiction, drug trafficking, money laundering and the other social impact on family life in our community. These are my real concerns. I am also particularly concerned for the housewives and the retirees. There will be people who will fall prey to glib-tongue racketeers and their fellow travellers. My fear is that local syndicates may lure these housewives and retirees, using underhand tactics and strip them of their hard-earned savings. They can be enticed into parting with their money under the guise of, say, a sure win bet, or they may be misled by some other quick return schemes. There must be awareness programmes of the dangers of gambling for the housewives and the elderly.

Column: 466

Thus far, from the measures announced by the Government, they are very generic and I hope that there will be special focus groups that will take care of the housewives and retirees, particularly the elderly group. Our own band of illegal money-lenders will, I am sure, be looking to cash in on the situation, and I urge the authorities to come down hard on them. Only last week, one young man came to seek for advice. He borrowed $6,000 from the loan shark and had paid $12,000 over the past six months, but the loan shark is still after him.

As for public education, I am glad that Mrs Yu-Foo has just informed us that MCYS would start the public education now, even before the casino is up. I believe we should educate the very young who are in our primary school so that when they grow up, they are fully aware of the dangers of gambling. This will have to be done in earnest and continually reviewed so that it remains relevant to the changing situation. Grassroots organisations should also be mobilised to use their network to reach out to everyone in the heartlands by holding discussions and forums to explain the pitfalls of gambling and how to stay away from falling into the trap.

I am pleased that the Government is setting up a National Council on Gambling and those who are opponents of the casinos will be invited to sit on the council to advise the Government on measure to mitigate the effects of gambling.

I know in Singapore, we have the infrastructure to tackle some of the scourges related to casino operations. Where we need to, we are beefing up or putting up new Government agencies to look into these issues. I also support the move for an integrated resort because I am confident that the Government, with its well-oiled machinery at its disposal, will put in place the necessary filters to

Column: 467

cushion the negative impact of gambling in our society.

I hope and believe that I am in effect speaking for many Singaporeans when I say: I too have faith in the strength of our various cultures as well as in our people. We will not be a city of gamblers. We will not be what we are not.

Dr Tan Cheng Bock (Ayer Rajah): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, like many before me, I too take a practical and realistic view of life. I do not approve gambling but do enjoy betting on Toto and 4-D occasionally with my friends, staff and my grassroots. In fact, on many special occasions, my grassroots would want me to pick the numbers of 4-D and Toto because they believe I got some luck. But so far, the winnings are small. I do hope that they will strike big one day.

Many speakers before me have spoken on the social ills of gambling. I share many of their concerns and I will not repeat what has already been said. I look at this debate from a global perspective and how the future holds for us. Many speakers, including the Prime Minister, SM and MM, have painted what future directions Singapore should take to avoid becoming a dull and unexciting place.

When I first entered this House in 1980, Singapore was obviously well ahead of many countries in the region. In fact, Singapore was an exciting place and our infrastructure was excellent, we have good airports and seaports, we got many visitors. There was less competition from the surrounding countries. China and India were not featured at all. Malaysians, Indonesians, Filipinos and Thais came here to shop and take in the sights. Tourism was indeed booming. Our main competitor then was Hong Kong. Life was simpler then and the tourist demand was less.

But over the last 10 years, I see changes happening at a very rapid pace.

Column: 468

The Shanghai I visited in 1987 and the Shanghai of today are vastly different. There are so many modern buildings and highways and the city is buzzing with activities, event happenings and conventions. Also, I can see changes in Australia; the Opera House and Darling Harbour are star attractions for many tourists.

Come closer to home is Malaysia. Only last week, I visited KL and Putrajaya and I can see that the changes that took place in KL and Putrajaya are really remarkable. The Twin Towers and KLCC complex, with its large shopping malls, convention centres, hotels and even a beautiful park for the busy businessmen to relax in between meetings, were established for them to enjoy. And I believe KL's night life is very trendy and hot. So Singapore is no longer that special for the tourists. It is becoming a stop-over place for the tourists, as mentioned by many in this House. They would not stay here long. The competition is heating up and Singapore must quickly change to meet the expectations of the modern tourists.

Yesterday, we heard many speakers mentioning how London changed, how New York changed, how the new iconic buildings in many countries are catching the attention of the modern tourists. The changing pattern of air travel, including cheap budget airfares, has brought a new dimension to the tourist trade. There are now many choices and many exotic destinations to go. So like what the Prime Minister and other Ministers have said, we have to take a critical look at ourselves, at our value systems we hold so dear, our past beliefs, our prejudices and compare them with the future needs of the country. It is a balancing act but we have to find the right mix. While we imbibe in new ideas, we have to watch carefully that we do not go overboard.

We have decided to move with the tide of change and bite the bullet and

Column: 469

accept the new changes that are happening around the world. But there are always consequences. Our Singaporeans were shocked when they heard that there were two instead of one mega integrated resort project. But I believe the decision was carefully and thoroughly researched. You can see three Ministries put forward their plans to cushion the possible social ills and security measures to ensure its success. This shows the determination of the Government to assure Singaporeans that the IR projects could be managed well and 35,000 jobs will be created.

These IR projects are enormous and mind-boggling. 95% of these projects will be theme parks of fun and games, with convention centres, hotels, and only 5% for casino. So why is it that Singaporeans are concerned about the 5% casino element? One, they are not aware of the other 95% in the first place. They have no idea of what the 95% is going to be like. They have no details. They were merely told. In fact, some of them were concerned that they have to pay $100 to enter into the complex. It shows that the communication is not so clear. In other words, they were not excited enough.

Of course, the media went to town on the casino issue. So, day in and day out, we read in the newspapers on how casinos are functioning and they only feature the bright lights of the casino.

But the most important reason is that the casino hits at the very virtues that this Government has always strived for - clean, safe, non-corrupt way of living. They fear that the casino will change our clean lifestyle and image, and I share their concerns.

At this juncture, I would like to thank the many Singaporeans who emailed me their concerns and fears. Let me read out an excerpt of one such letter. It is from a gentleman by the name of Daniel Koh Kah

Column: 470

Soon and this is what he said, and I quote, "Clearly the libertarian/utilitarian consideration has prevailed, but those who hold virtue ethics are saying that worthwhile virtues take a long time to cultivate and nurture. The virtues, which we have inherited and nurtured should not be eroded by an over-emphasis on libertarian/utilitarian concerns that may allow for vices like gambling to sneak in and undermine time-tested virtues, required and so necessary for any community to flourish as people of good character."

The thrust of his concern is shared by many. Personally, I think it is good that Singaporeans hold such views. Yet these virtues, I believe, built and nurtured in the family and Government, should put us in good stead to face the challenges the new Singapore we want to reinvent. I cannot imagine how the strong character that we have developed over the past would succumb to the temptations for the bright lights of the casinos so easily. But some may, although the majority will not. I think the reality of living in a big exciting global city is you have to live with the good and the bad. How we manage ourselves in the new global city that Singapore wants to aspire is a test of our resolve and strength. I am sure we are not gullible and naive.

Let me digress a bit to highlight a point. In the 1980s, in the old Parliament House, there was a heated debate on the report on the healthcare of the elderly. It was a report written by Mr Howe Yoon Chong, the Health Minister then. It was a good report, detailing how Singaporeans should examine the problems of the aged and called for many changes to the healthcare delivery system to meet the demands of an ageing population. But a small paragraph calling for a rethink on the CPF withdrawal at age 55 years was hijacked, and it became the central issue for that debate and the real virtue of that report was thrust aside. I see some

Column: 471

similarity in today's debate. So we must be careful. We must stay on course, explaining and extolling the virtues of these projects and yet detailing and assuring Singaporeans on the measures that we will be taking to cushion the social ill effects, the safety and security aspects of the casino project. I think this is very important. This assurance must be given to all Singaporeans.

We must keep to this thrust of argument and let Singaporeans understand the true benefits of the project. Get them excited through roadshows, and the media should help, and I am sure Singaporeans can come on board with us. So if anyone wants to hijack the casino element and turn it into a political potato, Singaporeans would have seen the merits of the projects and not be easily persuaded.

However, a resort would get outdated because land and money can build one. It would be slowly trumped by another one in time, but culture, arts and science create jobs for the long haul. Why do you think France and Spain are up there? They put a premium on creativity. Talent will go where they can contribute, not where they can be a consumer. So while we go for the IR, we must continue to build on our other institutions for the arts, science and culture.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, this debate is not just on integrated resorts but on how Singapore can position herself as a global city of excellence and distinction, how she can draw people of talent, tourists and businessmen, to this city, showcasing the arts, science, theatres, culture, and to events and activities. To do this, amongst others, we need to build activity-based iconic structures like the integrated resorts and the Esplanade and supported by an environment of good educational, health, cultural and business institutions. How we can find the right mix to excite the visitors to want to come back to our city and spend that tourist dollar is a

Column: 472

challenge not only for the Singapore Tourism Board but for all of us here in this House and for Singaporeans at large.

Dr Loo Choon Yong (Nominated Member): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, we heard many passionate speeches the last few days. Singaporeans outside this House have been treated to references to "whales", "sharks", "porridge", cooked and uncooked, with or without tonic. I think they will be forgiven if they have the mistaken belief that we are talking about where to get the best fish porridge in town.

But on a more serious note, having seen the exhibits of the RFC proposals, I wish that URA had obtained prior permission from the developers to enable the public to view these exhibits. Alternatively, the URA planner could actually have drawn up some concepts of integrated resorts as examples for public viewing so that the debate would have taken place with greater clarity.

As my colleague, Ms Irene Ng, has noted yesterday, there is a wide gap in perception and understanding of many people. Many people have not been to an IR, and even if they have visited the attractions, they may not realise that they have actually visited an IR.

What is " Shi jie ji zhong he du jia shen di " ? Mr Low Thia Khiang, the consummate politician, used the words " du chang ". In Hokkien, it is " geow geng ". These words conjure up images of seedy gambling joints and expectedly would draw strong gut reactions from people about the evils of gambling.

Because of the lack of clarity of concepts, the debate has at times gone off-tangent.

Like other colleagues who have viewed the exhibits, I have been impressed with a few of the proposals submitted. The impression is one of iconic buildings, attractions, convention facilities, hotel rooms, some offices and shopping malls. The casino part has been

Column: 473

intentionally tucked away to make it as inconspicuous as possible. Hence, it is clearly not the seedy gambling den or " du chang " that one sees on Channel 8 drama serial about old Shanghai in the 1930s.

About the casino proposal, I was a member of the Economic Review Committee and its Services Sub-committee. I remember the first draft report of the Tourism Working Group recommended having a casino on Sentosa as a "iller App". Mr Wee Ee-chao, an astute businessman and experienced property developer, was then Chairman of Singapore Tourism Board and he was chairman of the working group. He had been working and thinking about the various options available to Singapore to revitalise our tourism sector. He saw clearly what was needed to be done. He felt that we need to have resorts on a scale that would draw in the tourists. Better still, these resorts should have gaming casinos. He was prepared to challenge the then conventional wisdom of not permitting casinos. He is clearly ahead of his time.

Like others on the subcommittee, I preferred the less controversial option of having performing and visual arts to draw tourists. Well, the Esplanade has been built and Singapore Arts Museum has been around for some time, but our tourism industry is still not strong, and hotel and retail trades are still very weak.

Sir, my constant concern for Singapore has been our long-term sustainability and viability as an economy. Without a sustainable and robust economy, our nationhood and sovereignty will easily be undermined. Our vision to make Singapore a land of opportunity for our children and our grandchildren will never materialise. When our young feel that there is no future for them in Singapore, we will quickly lose them to other countries. Despite what we may

Column: 474

say of our education system, our young are well-trained, talented and very mobile. Many countries welcome them.

In these last few years, our economic fundamentals have changed. We can no longer rely on manufacturing alone to create jobs. We need more service sector jobs. We have had to make many 'U' turns. To grow the service sector, we have to open up our education sector and we are promoting ourselves as the medical hub.

The stakes are high. It is about our long-term survival. As Minister Mentor said in this House earlier, we cannot afford to be left out of the global circuit and global network. We cannot afford to risk becoming irrelevant in this new world. We must not risk being bypassed.

Some have asked, "Are we that desperate that we need to 'U' turn and accept a casino on our soil?" No, we are not that desperate now, but in my own view, there is a grave risk that we may be bypassed by the world, and then it will be too difficult and too late to get back into the circuit. We have no control over these externalities. On the other hand, we can at least do something to minimise and alleviate the incremental social problems that we anticipate.

We must also not fall into the trap of complacency and slow death. We have only recently got our wake-up call in the last recession to keep our economy competitive.

Yes, this is a difficult decision. I know the Prime Minister and his Cabinet colleagues agonised over this decision. I think, like myself, many colleagues in this House had to search our own conscience to decide our own stand on the issue.

The issue is difficult because an estimated 55,000 persons are at risk of becoming problem gamblers. To me, these are 55,000 problems too many. In

Column: 475

my work as a doctor and social worker, I have seen many families wrecked by gambling, just like many families have been wrecked by illicit drugs, alcohol and other addictions. These are all very painful situations, and I am sure my colleagues here have all experienced this sort of scenarios, helping constituents, friends, and sometimes relatives, going through such hard times.

But Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, we must also remember that joblessness and business failures can wreck many homes too. It has. Many families begin to dysfunction and disintegrate when the breadwinner loses his job. Children drop out of schools. We have more than 300,000 Singaporeans between 45 to 64 years old who have only primary education or less. How are we going to provide them jobs? Even when we get them, today's manufacturing jobs are highly computerised and they require training or retraining which these workers with minimal education may find hard to cope. I am very touched by Mr Lim Boon Heng's compassion for Singapore workers. As NTUC chief, he must intimately know what life is like for the retrenched worker and his family, especially when they have little education for retraining. He courageously went ahead to support the proposal for IR because he "could not ignore the opportunity for creating 35,000 jobs".

The Prime Minister quoted Deng Xiaoping. Yes, we need to open our windows, lest we suffocate. But, we can keep the flies and other pests out with appropriate netting. In this way, only very small insects can get through, for which we must prepare a whole host of pesticides and antidotes. Better still, we immunise our population against these bugs, through public education about the dangers of gambling.

I appreciate the responsible manner with which Ministers of Home Affairs,

Column: 476

MCYS and Health are preparing to deal with the expected problems.

Yes, we certainly need a strong regulatory regime to ensure that the casino does not become a seedy gambling den, infested with loan sharks, money launderers, pimps, and drug peddlers. We need to set up a Council of wise men and women to help our society deal with this challenge. For those who still succumb, MOH has prepared plans to upgrade CAMP to help those with gambling problems.

I believe this is a responsible way of dealing with the anticipated incremental social problems. And I am confident that with these efforts, we can substantially reduce or minimise the problems. Religious and community organisations can play useful roles to assist Singaporeans to prepare for this challenging new environment. They can also mobilise their members, followers and other Singaporeans to voluntarily exclude themselves from the casino, an option which Minister Vivian said will be made available. With all these preventive efforts and perhaps more, I hope we will be able to have an IR or two IRs where religious groups may feel comfortable enough to have their functions there and parents will feel safe enough to bring their young for fun at the attractions. Then we would have been successful and have our cake and eat it too.

Some people have asked, "Have we lost our soul?" "Are we destroying our values?", when we proceed to have casinos on our soil. I think Singapore's moral DNA is one that upholds and celebrates hard work, thrift, and integrity. Yes, we eschew "get rich quick" schemes. Hence we are uncomfortable with having casinos at the IRs as some feel our values of hard work and honest living will be eroded. However, let us remember that pragmatism, responsiveness, and hard-headedness are also our enduring, if not so endearing, attributes. And these are values helping us to

Column: 477

consider having casinos in the IRs. But all these wonderful attributes are not our soul, but different manifestations of it. To me, our soul as a society is our collective resolve to remain as an independent and sovereign nation with our distinctive values, multi-racial and multi-religious way of life.

Nordic countries like Denmark, Finland, Netherlands, Sweden and Switzerland all have casinos but their people continue to work hard and continue to be creative and come up with new technologies. As I shared with this House previously, they are small nations capable of sustaining their economies. Despite having casinos, I believe their fundamental values and integrity have not been eroded. Their social fabric has not been torn asunder or weakened. So there is no reason why we cannot survive this.

Sir, with all these reassurances given by the Prime Minister and other Ministers, I support the decision to proceed with two integrated resorts with casinos. Having decided to proceed with the IRs with casinos, we must ensure that we obtain as much economic benefits as possible. The IRs and casinos are expected to create 10,000 new jobs. The spin-off effect is expected to add another 25,000 jobs. I am concerned that the developers may be tempted to focus on the gaming profits and neglect the attractions. This is important as the spin-off effect of economic boost and job creation can only happen if the attractions are truly world class and draw large numbers of tourists to Singapore. These attractions are likely to be loss-leaders and it makes great business sense for developers to do the minimum necessary.

I propose, therefore, that the Government, as it works out the details, ensure that the maximum casino revenue to be retained by the operator should be pegged

Column: 478

to certain multiples of revenue of other attractions or tourist arrivals to the IRs. In this way, we will ensure we obtain the anticipated economic spin-offs.

My second proposal is that as the IRs will be built over a few years, developers will certainly try to complete the casino portion first and operate for gaming revenue as soon as possible, just as they did in Macau. This would be a very bad start. We will then be having casinos without IRs for a few years. So I suggest that we must insist that gaming not be allowed until the IRs are substantially completed and the other attractions in operation.

Sir, in this whole year's long debate, I have been impressed with the openness of the process. In the Budget debate, I called for a binding referendum even though this is not a life and death issue. I did that because I wanted the Government to demonstrate clearly that it has not made up its mind and that it seriously considers the views of religious and social groups and others opposed to the idea and are prepared to take a vote on it. Notwithstanding that, I am glad that this usually efficient Government has been "uncharacteristically inefficient", taking more than a year to come to this decision. I am glad that the Government has not rushed into this decision. The deliberations have been worth it. Like Mr Tan Soo Khoon, I applaud the process of open public consultation. I applaud the "inclusiveness" of the public consultation, where we listened to every person's view and weigh its merits regardless of his background, race, language, or religion, and in the case of Chia Teck Leng, regardless of his current status or residential address.

In fact, I have always been arguing that the PAP Government should be the last to fear public consultations and debates. We all know that it has a stable of fierce debaters - super heavyweight,

Column: 479

heavyweight, bantamweight, etc. But it is also good to acknowledge from time to time that the Cabinet does not have a monopoly on all wisdom, definitely not in this debate, as it is quite clear that Chia Teck Leng has exhibited greater expertise and experience in casino gaming than the Cabinet. I hope we are witnessing the "greening of Singapore" - whether the Government initiating more public consultations and debates, or people being more willing to express their views and ideas. This is something a whole generation of thinking and caring Singaporeans have been hoping and waiting for.

I also like to join issues with Mr Tan Soo Khoon and Minister Mentor about Cabinet, Government and collective responsibility. I believe that Government Ministers who publicly disagree with expressed Government policy, without the Prime Minister's approval, need to leave the Cabinet. Such is the convention in Constitutional Law and I see no good reason to depart from it. However, I see a distinction between a Minister's personal view and his view as a Minister. I see a distinction between a Minister adhering to collective responsibility and showing his views, thoughts and feelings on certain subjects and issues in his personal capacity. I believe that such sharing would be important for our society, as it helps our people to relate to the ways decisions are being made. Minister Mentor, Senior Minister and other Ministers have said clearly that they are against gambling. But for Singapore's future, as Cabinet Ministers, they support the IRs with casinos.

I would urge the Prime Minister and his Cabinet colleagues to share their personal views and feelings on public issues more freely. In this way, more people will know that their views are being shared by the leaders, considered and deliberated. There is pluralism in views, but decisions are ultimately made on a rational basis with all these views

Column: 480

taken into consideration. I believe, in this way, our political fabric will be strengthened and Singaporeans need not fear expressing their personal views, and we will be richer for it.

Sir, having made our judgement on this difficult decision, we should close ranks and move on. 18th April 2005 need not be a sad day for Singapore. I applaud the Prime Minister's intention to meet with religious and social groups opposed to casinos in Singapore. Just like he has persuaded many of us here, I believe that his candour, sincerity and compassion will persuade these leaders that this decision is in the long-term interests of Singapore and all Singaporeans.

Mr Deputy Speaker: Order. I propose to take the break now. I suspend the Sitting and will take the Chair again at 4.15 pm.

_Sitting accordingly suspended
at 3.55 pm until 4.15 pm.
_

Sitting resumed at 4.15 pm

[Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Chew Heng Ching) in the Chair]

PROPOSAL TO DEVELOP INTEGRATED RESORTS: Debate resumed.

Dr Ong Seh Hong (Aljunied): ( In Mandarin ): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, when I first heard that the Government was studying the possibility of setting up an IR with casino, my immediate reaction was that the opening of a casino here is not a good thing, although personally I am not against gambling. But after a year of getting views from all quarters, and understanding what an IR is all about, its economic benefits and possibility of creating jobs, I have changed my stand on it.

Column: 481

From religious and moral standpoints, gambling is not a good thing. But if you think in a deeper level, you will realise that the problem is not on gambling but on the people. If people become compulsive gamblers, they will bring about other social problems. I come from a low income family. Those around me used to engage in various forms of gaming, such as mahjong , cards, etc. There were old people who played the four-colour cards and young people who played various games with the poker cards, such as the three old men, blackjack, rummy, and so on. They also played number games. Some actually engaged in underground, illegal gambling or 4-D. Every weekend, a lot of them indulged in horse betting or other games. From young, I learned a lot about all these games. When I was younger, I played with cards. As I grew older, when I was in junior college, I started playing mahjong . I realised that mahjong is a highly skill-based game. But it is also very easy for one to get addicted, especially when you are young, you can play it through the night. Later on, I realised that this was not healthy. So I decided that I should play not more than eight rounds of the so-called "healthy mahjong ". Small gambling is good for temperament, but do not indulge in big gambling.

Ever since I became an MP, I have less time to play mahjong . I have been to casinos. The first time when I went to a casino was after my graduation. I went to Genting. I played the jackpot machines then. Very quickly, I realised that I had lost about 200 ringgit. For me, at the time, that was a big sum of money. After that, whenever I had a chance to go to a casino, I would set a limit on how much I would spend on the jackpot machines. If I lose $50 or $100, I would stop playing the game. If I manage to hit the jackpot, I would leave immediately. This actually helps me not to get addicted.

Column: 482

As for betting on the gaming tables in the casino, I only did it once and that was in Gaborone, the capital of Botswana. I was attending the Commonwealth Ministers' Conference and there was a casino at the hotel where we stayed. It was a very far out place and there is no other place to go during our leisure time. So I took the time between the meetings to take a walk in the casino. It was not a very big casino. It was more like a club. But there were a lot of Chinese there. In fact, almost all the gamblers were Chinese. This was because there were a lot of Chinese going there to set up clothes manufacturing factories. I stood near to a table to watch them playing blackjack. I saw there were three Chinese gamblers. Lady luck was apparently not smiling at one of them. He lost all his money and started borrowing from his friends. Soon, all three of them lost all their money. I set down and started playing. In fact, my luck was pretty good. I won about $30-$40. Then I stood up to go. The three gamblers looked at me enviously. They said, "Your luck is so good. Why don't you continue?" Of course, I did not continue to play because I knew if I had continued to play, I would end up losing back all that I had won, and I would lose my own money as well.

Mr Deputy Speaker, the question is why there are people who get addicted to gambling and why I did not. For example, Senior Minister Goh and other Ministers have gone to casinos but they did not get addicted. There are few reasons for that. First, we all know that the attraction of gambling, whether you are buying 4-D or you are playing on the jackpot machines or blackjack, the odds are not good for the gamblers. The chances of winning are very low. I am lucky that when I was in school, we actually learned permutation and combination in our mathematics. We can calculate and hence realise how difficult it is for one to win. Secondly, during my school days, we were taught good values. There is no free lunch in

Column: 483

this world. So we have to work hard to make a living. I am a Buddhist and I know we are not supposed to have greed and to get ill-gotten money. But there are many other Singaporeans who aspire to have a better life. I am like them too.

When it comes to gambling, to me, it is a game. I know as a fact that it will not bring about great wealth. For me, small gains are good for the temperament. I can lose a few dollars, a little bit of money. That, I can afford. People oppose the opening of casinos because they believe that people will rush to the casino and become addicted to gambling. In Geylang, there are brothels and prostitution. They have been in existence for decades. That does not mean that everybody will go there to frequent the prostitutes. No doubt, even if there is only 1%, 2% or 3% of the population addicted to gambling, it will be bad for our society. At the moment, we do not know exactly why people become compulsive gamblers, but we do know that some of these people like to take risk. Some may be so because of their family background or have some psychological problems, like depression, drug addiction, personality problem, alcoholism, etc. From scientific research, we found that neuro transmitters are closely linked to addiction. Some found that in gambling, it stimulates the production of dopamine which is a neuro transmitter. This neuro transmitter, once stimulated, will make the people feel high. That is the reason why these people go for the games and get addicted in the process.

Some scientists are studying to find out which part of the gambling brings about the release of dopamine. They used monkeys to do the experiment. During the experiment, they put a monkey in front of the computer screen and on the screen, you can choose five different designs, just like the jackpot machine. There are some combinations of pictures, and you can win a prize if you strike any

Column: 484

one of them, for example, a mouthful of fruit juice. Then they found that when there was a certain combination where the monkey could not guess what was coming up next, not knowing what prize it was going to win, the dopamine secretion becomes more. So if the monkey can guess whether they will win or lose, the dopamine secretion becomes lower. This means that during expectation and guessing, the stage between the two, the brain is stimulated to secrete more dopamine. That is how people get addicted. We need to have some preventive measures. Of course, the Ministry of Health will set up funds to conduct research in the Institute of Mental Health. We are very happy to learn that they are going to do this.

From here, we can see that not everyone will get addicted. Just because we are going to have a casino, it does not mean that everybody is going to become a compulsive gambler. It is not quite possible to ban gambling completely. The Chinese have been known to be a race of people who love gambling. This is not a question of right or wrong. From the Chinese history, we know that gambling has been banned before. In the warring states, if any ordinary citizen gambled, he would be fined three gold coins. If the prince gambled, he would be caned. During the Han Dynasty, the founding Emperor Lui Pang stated that if a senior official gambled, he would not only be removed from his position, but his possessions would also be confiscated. During the Sung Dynasty, those who gambled would have their hands chopped off. Despite all these severe punishments, gambling still remained within the Chinese community.

Here, we need to adopt a more practical attitude to face the problems which gambling will bring about. On the one hand, we need to strengthen our values. On the other hand, we have to reduce the number of people who are

Column: 485

likely to become compulsive gamblers. It is very good that the family can stop certain people from going to the casinos. I do not think an entrance fee of $100 will really serve to deter the gamblers. This can be improved. When we levy this entrance fee, it is to prevent Singaporeans from going there every now and then, and thus becoming compulsive gamblers. But there are some Singaporeans who may want to go there once in a while, for example, those who go to Genting or Batam. For those who are already addicted, $100 is not going to deter them. They will go anyway. They can go to the neighbouring countries to gamble, or they may pay the yearly fee of $2,000 and go there more frequently to make full use of the subscription. This may encourage them to go there more often. It is not going to help. To the ordinary Singaporeans who want to go on a cruise or to Genting to gamble once or twice a year, then $100 is a big sum. If they go to Genting, the trip may cost less than $100. When you do that, the money will flow out to the neighbouring countries. We want to keep all this money within Singapore. It is better.

I suggest that we change this entrance fee to a sliding scale, for example, for the first time, it is a minimum sum, for the second to fifth times, $100, more than six times, you need to pay $200 or $300, and the annual membership fee should be $10,000. This will deter those who like to go to a casino frequently. At the same time, we can allow those people who like to go for a spin-around in the casino a chance to do so.

Next, I would like to talk about gambling among the youths. What can the Government actually do to help them? I know that we have a lot of measures to prevent gambling from getting excessive. But we do not have anything which actually pinpoints at the youths. For

Column: 486

example, in America, some studies have shown that students in universities have very serious gambling problems. Youth gambling problems are much higher than the adults, and some studies have also found out that if you start younger, there are more chances of becoming problem gamblers. I have also seen that in China, from the Internet, they also have such problems with the youths. In Singapore, I do not have any real figures to look at. But when I talked to some of the students, I find that football gambling is prevalent among them. Some of them even buy 4-D. If they are under-aged, what they will do is that they will get their older friends to buy or to put the bets down for them and to get the winnings from them.

Another problem is that, with the Internet becoming more widely used, there are more and more problems of Internet gambling. Our youths always log on to the net. What they face on the net is even greater. I hope that the Government will have some measures to help them. This may entail the Ministry of Education, etc. We should have some funds to study whether the youths have such a problem and how bad it is, and we have to find preventive measures for those youths who are already addicted to gambling and find ways to help them overcome their addiction.

Secondly, we must also step up moral education in schools. I find that, especially when we want to build casinos, it is very important the schools should continue to infuse the right moral values into the students so that we will not lose our forefathers' honest and hardworking values. We should also have more activities to let the students have better and more wholesome activities and not spend their time on gambling instead.

Thirdly, we must look at the problem of gambling squarely. We must also teach the students what gambling is

Column: 487

about, and not just to scare them. For example, when I was young, even though I came into contact with a lot of these gambling activities, I could withstand the temptation to gamble because I understood the dangers of gambling. The chances of losing are more than winning, so it means that the odds are never in favour of the gamblers. That will prevent us from being trapped into indulging in gambling. We will be a little bit more objective when we look at gambling. Through education on gambling, the students will know that gambling is not an activity that will bring about economic gains. So, when they grow up, if they really want to gamble, they should do it more for leisurely or entertainment purposes. I hope that strict measures could be adopted to punish those who abet youths to gamble.

Fourthly, Internet gambling. I know this is not very prevalent or a very big problem in Singapore as yet. I hope that we could look at it and study this and enact some laws to prevent such activities because when you go into Internet gambling, you do not have to pay an entrance fee. The problems that it brings about in the future could be even greater than the problems brought about by the two casinos in the IRs.

Mr Loh Meng See (Jalan Besar): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, this year we will be celebrating Singapore's 40th year of independence. The Government has on Monday, 18th April, announced its momentous decision to develop two integrated resorts with casinos at Marina Bayfront and Sentosa.

I have listened carefully to the Prime Minister and Ministers who have spoken on the subject. Indeed, I can sense the ambivalence they held and the moral dilemma they faced in arriving at this very difficult decision. I respect their decision, as I have been taught to submit to those in authority who have been empowered

Column: 488

and who will be held accountable for the decisions they made. We will render to Caesar what is Caesar's, and to God what is God's.

But I wish they had decided differently, as I disagree strongly in having a casino in Singapore. As I reflect on the matter, the question that plays in my mind is: why are we faced with such a Hobson's choice today? Minister Mentor has said that "the cost of not doing it is even greater". We have been told that not to proceed with the development is worse than proceeding with it. We have been asked to pay the perceived minimal cost in human suffering to enjoy the larger economic benefit. My view is that, after three and four generations, the costs will outweigh the benefits, and many of us here today will not be around to see the consequences, but our children and grandchildren will be.

Is this the way to measure policy outcomes? Have we fully explored all alternatives before we ask only casino operators to put the proposals? Are we sure that we want to put our destiny in tourism and a not insignificant part of our economy in the hands of two foreign casino operators? Are we sure that the novelty of integrated resorts would not wear out? Are they fully recession-proof? Would it not hollow out the other businesses in Singapore if one-third of the casino income is to come from Singaporeans?

After 40 years of independence, we must adjust our thinking from being fixated with the idea that economic prosperity is all that matters. There is a very high cost that accompanies with the single-minded pursuit of wealth and prosperity. We are already a developed economy enjoying a higher average per capita income. To have an annual economic growth of an average of 3-6% is not insignificant.

Column: 489

We need the cultural ballast and strong national values and social graces to provide the balance in the way we live. The world wants us to seek instant gratification and temporary pleasures, but if our people are too stressed out and not having the happiness, peace and joy in their hearts, then it counts for nothing. What our people need is healthy relationships with their family, neighbours and the community. Instead, we see dysfunctional families and quarrelling neighbours. In the lexicon of Thomas Friedman, we are forsaking our olive tree by trading it for a newer and bigger model of Lexus.

Personally, I am all for economic growth and prosperity. But I am not so sure whether, if we keep on going the way we are, our communities will not fall apart. Switzerland and the Nordic countries I hear earlier, have been held as excellent examples of how the Swiss work, live and play. I like some of what they do. We should follow the Swiss in keeping the Sabbath in not washing the cars and mowing the grass on Sundays, not flushing the toilets in the night as it could disturb the neighbours, buy and support locally-made goods even if they are more expensive than foreign goods. For every issue that affects the whole community, they hold a referendum to decide. The Swiss possess the maturity, strong cultural and social values that we Singaporeans lack.

We have read the document written by Mr Chia Teck Leng on the casino escapades. He feels that we ought to go ahead with the casino. I am not so sure how much weight we want to place on the opinions of a man who has been imprisoned because of his addiction to gambling. Unfortunately, we do not have a chance to hear the feeling of his wife and two teenage sons. If we were to hear their side of the story, we would

Column: 490

have a different perspective of the untold harm that has been caused. My real concern is that we will not know whether we have made the right or wrong decision until perhaps 10 to 20 years later. By that time, the situation in Singapore would have deteriorated beyond recognition.

I cannot understand the argument put forward that, as gambling is already in existence, the harm is incremental in nature. Do we not know that two wrongs do not make a right? The damage and harm to society could be compounding and cumulative in nature and rising exponentially. With the proliferation of vices, we will be like frogs in hot water, and we do not know that we will be boiled to death.

The Government has made the decision. I will respect it. But I will discourage Singaporeans to contribute their expected one-third share to the casino income and, instead, contribute the money to charity to help the needy and disadvantaged. When political leaders share their stories of "little" gambling experiences in this House, unwittingly and subtly we are telling the young that it is all right to try and play 4-D and jackpot machines and have some fun. That, to me, is the thin end of the wedge, the beginning of disaster.

It is exactly what I am afraid of. Over time, our people's guard will go down, slowly but surely. We can explain and rationalise our actions, we get into a mode of denial. Gambling and other vices become the norm in our society. Slowly, warm water turns to hot water, then to boiling water. It is a matter of degree, but it is also the difference between life and death.

This surely cannot be. Our young should be taught good moral ethical values. Gambling is like smoking, something not to be tried in the first place.

Column: 491

Therefore,