Parliamentary Speeches After Casino Debate
I find Senior Minister Gong Chok Tong’s remark in the Parliament on the casino issue as one of the rare speech by politicians. Not forgetting he was a First Class Honours in economics from the University of Singapore, 1965, he dissected his reasons for a casino in a mildly economist way.
"We should look at the incremental social costs, not the total social costs, and balance them against the [incremental] economic benefits and social problems of unemployment."
"The debate is not really over whether we should or should not have a casino. It is whether we should forgo the Integrated Resort because of its gaming component [opportunity cost analysis]. It is about our economic future over the increase in social costs. It is about families who would benefit from the jobs created versus families who could have their lives destroyed because of gambling. It is about whether we want to have a vibrant, cosmopolitan and fun Singapore or a fuddy-duddy Singapore."
His 4 reasons to move on to the next stage of the project are
- Credibility of Singapore and how Singapore is perceived
- Economic benefits
- Easy access to existing casinos
- Manageable incremental social costs
He cited anecdotes of his worldwide encounters with businessmen, high-rollers and ministers, and humorous moments of his gambling history and casino visits during official missions. The speech is light, with the underlying reasoning remains clearcut. Some of his findings are eye-opening to me, that I had never given a thought to, such as "static tourist sights will not attract repeat visitors, but the ever-changing scene of world-class entertainment will", and having skylight to prevent gamblers from losing track of time.
And there is Mr Lee Kuan Yew’s remark. He started off with a narrative of his observations during the Japanese occupation, his student years, as a young lawyer, and when he first took office in 1959. As usual, he gave a very broad view and examined the situation from a global perspective. What is every part of the world evolving into, what impact do they have on Singapore, what lessons can we learn, can Singapore afford not to adapt and reposition itself, will the best offers just vanish and not go to somewhere else in the region if we reject them, what is lack in Tokyo etc. He depicted a picture where Singapore can bring itself to greater height, at the same time with the basic values held firm.
Both of them are for casinos in Singapore. The difference lies in their stance on gambling as stated in their first line.
Goh Chok Tong: I do not approve of gambling but I am not anti-gambling.
Lee Kuan Yew: I am anti-gambling.
Note that their speeches were not in the core Parliamentary debate. They were just sharing their views on casino after the debate. Transcripts of the ministerial statements are available on the government website.
- Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong explains how the Cabinet reached this decision.
- Minister for Trade and Industry, Mr Lim Hng Kiang explains the tourism and economic aspects of the proposal.
- Minister for Community Development, Youth and Sports, Dr Vivian Balakrishnan explains the safeguards to limit the social impact of casino gambling.
- Minister for Home Affairs, Mr Wong Kan Seng explains issues of law and order and enforcement.
- Minister-In-Charge of Muslim Affairs, Dr Yaacob Ibrahim responds on what this decision means to the Muslim community and how should they approach it.
