Casino Debate Singapore
- Based on the Parliament debate on the casino in April 2005 and various newspaper reports, the below is a compilation of which MPs supported or didn't object to the setting up of casinos in Singapore. Note: These are only the MPs that spoke up during the Parliament debate, or those who were reported in the newspapers.
- Former Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong has recalled how he made a practical decision to support having casinos in Singapore 15 years ago, when his colleagues in the Cabinet were divided on the issue.
Casino In Singapore Debate, blackjack i617, northwood casino iowa, online gambling yahoo answers. Nemacolin Woodlands Resort. 1001 Lafayette Dr, Farmington, PA 15437.
SINGAPORE: Singapore's first casino-resort partially opened yesterday, a key part of a government plan to reduce reliance on manufacturing and brand the tightly controlled city-state as a cosmopolitan Asian capital.
Resorts World Sentosa, built by Malaysia's Genting Bhd at a cost of $5 billion, opened 1,340 rooms in four hotels, including a Hard Rock hotel and a property designed by architect Michael Graves. Its 7,300-seat ballroom, one of Asia's largest, will host its first event at the end of this month.
A Universal Studios theme park is expected to open in the coming weeks on the sprawling 49-hectare complex on Sentosa, an island a quarter of a mile off Singapore's coast. No firm date has been set, said Genting chairman Lim Kok Thay, contradicting reports it would open next week.
The resort's casino, the city-state's first, is expected to open in March after Genting's application for a license was delayed from October to December when gambling authorities asked for more information. Officials have said it will probably take three months to process the license.
Singapore-known for its ban on chewing gum sales and canings for crimes some countries would rule as minor-strictly controls public speech and assembly, although it has become socially more liberal and allowed greater artistic freedom in recent years. The decision to allow casinos followed a rare national debate though the government's desired outcome was never in doubt.
The city is also developing its second casino resort, the $5.5 billion Marina Bay Sands developed by US-based Las Vegas Sands Corp and due to open in April this year, after its original opening at the end of last year was postponed.
Sands plans to open a casino, 1,000 out of its 2,500 hotel rooms, a part of its huge shopping mall, and one of Southeast Asia's largest convention and exhibition centers as the first phase. Several other attractions at the resort will be unveiled a few months later, including Asia's largest sky park.
| ||||
With a well-educated population that speaks English, Chinese and Malay, Singapore is increasingly focusing on finance and tourism, said Irvin Seah, an economist with DBS Bank in Singapore.
'Services are really a green pasture going forward for Singapore,' Seah said. 'It's the area which we really want to fully exploit and it's where we have a comparative advantage in the region.'
Las Vegas Sands, the world's No.2 casino operator by market capitalisation, does not expect its Singapore operations to cannibalize Macao's mass casino market, its Chief Executive Officer Sheldon Adelson said.
Adelson, who expects its Singapore operation to generate $1 billion in earnings before interest, tax, depreciation, and amortisation in its first year.
Casino Debate Singapore Official
The two resorts reflect an attempt by Singapore in recent years to ease social restrictions and transform the staid city-state into a more attractive destination for tourists, foreign talent and investors as the country diversifies its economy to stay ahead amid stiffer economic competition from neighboring countries.
Casino Debate Singapore Today
The government decided to reverse its long-standing opposition to casinos in 2005 when Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong announced, after a heated public debate, that he will allow two casinos to be introduced into Singapore for the first time.
AP-Reuters-Kyodo
For years they've called Singapore the nanny state, not just because the sale of chewing gum was banned but also because the government knows best, controls all and likes everything neat and proper.
So what would the nanny say about opening a megacasino?
In the past the government insisted it never would happen. 'Over my dead body' is how Singapore's founding leader, Lee Kuan Yew, once put it, rejecting gambling as an affront to the Singaporean ethic of hard work and clean living.
Lee is retired but remains Singapore's elder statesman, and his son is the prime minister. But surprisingly the government is moving to permit casino gambling, even as a good number of citizens remain opposed.
That has led to a second very unusual situation: a vigorous public debate over a sensitive political issue, which in this tightly run city-state is akin to--heaven forbid--talking back to your nanny.
As the government solicits bids from international casino operators, members of Singapore's diverse religious and ethnic community--Christians, Buddhists, Muslims, Hindus--are speaking out against the idea, while a citizen group called Families Against the Casino Threat in Singapore has organized a Web site and cell phone text-message campaign. It says it has collected 27,000 signatures opposing the casino.
Singapore's Cabinet, which also is said to be divided over the idea, is listening to the debate and intends to make a decision this spring.
'At the end of the day, it's a bet on whether you think you can control the spillover evil effects and how much confidence you have in the maturity of the population,' Lee was quoted as saying recently at a business conference.
Political observers see different motives and implications in what is happening, with the most fascinating analysis suggesting that Singapore is on the cusp of a new era of openness.
'The casino has mobilized a lot of Singaporeans to work against what's seen as the government's interests,' said Hanshih Lee, a Singaporean magazine editor and former newspaper business columnist. 'Once [the public] gets a taste of this, they will try it with other things.'
Putting it in nanny-state terms, it's as if the government finally may be acknowledging that its charges are growing up.
The debate 'speaks volumes about modern Singapore and the way the government is trying to give its citizens more of a voice in society, distancing itself from the nanny-state style of government that characterized the country's first 35 years,' said a foreign diplomat here who spoke on condition of anonymity.
Before taking office last year, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said it was time to 'cut the apron strings' because 'nanny should not look after everything all the time.'
Nightlife and racy magazines
Looking around Singapore, a tropical nation of 4.35 million people with gleaming office towers and clean streets, there is a bit more of a cosmopolitan feel than a decade ago. The city has a vibrant nightlife scene and several large international bookstores that even sell racy magazines. Two years ago the government made a big deal of permitting a bungee-jumping arcade to open along the river.
In another high-profile move, homosexuals now are recruited for government jobs, though homosexual activity technically remains illegal.
There also is a lot that has not changed in Singapore, a country whose reputation was cemented in 1994 when the government punished 18-year-old American Michael Fay with a caning for vandalism.
Casino Debate Singapore Contact
The caning incident--which still comes up in conversations here--reflected Singapore's obsession with order and discipline. Those same concerns have colored Singapore's docile brand of democracy, in which directly challenging the government is considered out of bounds. Opposition politicians are all but shut out by the ruling party while the major news media rest in the hands of government friends. A predictable political system is seen as best for developing the economy.
None of that cautiousness is likely to change overnight. It says enough about Singapore-style politics that many observers in Asia think authoritarian China considers Singapore's open-but-closed system as a model for its future.
Gillian Koh, a research fellow at the Institute of Policy Studies in Singapore, thinks the main reason the government is encouraging debate over the casino is that it had been on record as opposing the idea and it can protect its credibility by allowing the nation to be swayed by economic arguments for it.
'Very often people say that the government invites public consultation, but you aren't sure if it's for real or icing on the cake,' Koh said. In this instance, she said, 'They can afford to be honest because the Cabinet is split.'
The argument in favor of the casino is that it will boost the economy and stanch the estimated $1 billion in gambling money that leaves the country each year for Macau and other gaming centers.
Casino Debate Singapore News
The proposed casino would be part of a large-scale entertainment and tourism center. To address concerns that the poor will be enticed to gamble, the government would require Singaporeans to pay a $60 daily entrance fee. Foreigners would be exempt.
A bid to reinvent itself
But the government also sees something bigger in the casino debate. Rather than focusing on political openness, it is pitching the casino as part of a broader campaign to reinvent Singapore and cast off the image of nannyhood. For years Singapore has lamented that it had become too strait-laced and was in danger of falling behind in the global economic competition.
'Really, it is a question of the maturity of our society and the type of society which we want to have going forward,' Vivian Balakrishnan, a government minister, said in an interview. 'We all know that we live in a rapidly changing, highly competitive world--one in which we will need all Singaporeans to grow up, to be responsible, to take responsibility for their own actions, including facing the consequences of their choices.'