Stacked for

On his return from a tour in Cambodia--fittingly enough--this being where many Thai nationals head regularly on gambling jaunts unavailable to them on the their home ground, Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej called for the legalization of casinos in select tourist resorts in Thailand.

The PM describes this as a means of generating income and, he says, would be"one way to undermine the illegal casinos in Thailand." The Prime Minister supports the idea of setting up casinos at hotels in Thai tourist resorts to attract foreign tourists and Thai nationals.

According to the Prime Minister's plan, foreigners would be allowed free access to the casinos, but, as measure of curbing the ill-effects on those who cannot afford to gamble, Thai nationals would need to pay a membership fee.

The PM's declaration has of course, blown the lid off a subject that has already been widely--albeit often clandestinely--discussed in this country.

As neighbouring countries continue to change and modify their laws to make it possible for governments to cash in on the casinos, Thailand is falling behind. What's more, Thais who want to and can afford to gamble have been heading across borders and taking their incomes with them.

In a double whammy for Thailand, not only is it missing out on all the foreign exchange brought in by tourists keen to gamble, it's also 'losing' its own wealth to other countries.

And then there's illegal gambling. What the PM describes as "rampant", is just that.

Take Phuket alone: last year, gambling topped the monthly crime statistics, according to the Phuket Provincial Police. 284 arrests on charges of gambling were made in December 2007 alone, compared to 131 drug-related arrests, 103 reported cases of theft and 21 arrests for possession illegal firearms.
This is only Phuket. The notion that banning casinos helps control gambling is then resting on rather thin ground.

Perhaps the most overwhelming case for the casinos is that governments all around Thailand have been accommodating, and reaping the benefits from them, at least financially.

The Cambodian Daily today reports that a burgeoning casino industry is expected to provide US$20 million of tax revenues for the Cambodian government in 2008. Tax revenues amounted to US$18 million in 2007, US$16 million in 2006 and US$12 million in 2005, the paper quoted statistics from the Ministry of Economics and Finance.

The irony of it all, perhaps, and most poignantly for Thailand, is that the largest casino concentrations are along the national borders, with fifteen near the Thai borders and ten along the Vietnamese. It is hardly a secret that Thai nationals have been crossing this border for years, lured precisely by this knowledge.

In 2005, Singapore decided to scrap its long-standing ban on casinos; a decision precluded and followed by raging controversy. Just before Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong made the final announcement in parliament, Seah Hiang Hong, head of research at Kim Eng Research, part of a local stockbroking house, summed it up, saying,"basically at the end of the day the government is driven by economic consideration."

Tourism affects Singapore's airline industry, he continued, and its status as an aviation hub, which in turn also affects the rest of the economy.

By the by, Singapore awarded its first contract to Las Vegas Sands, which plans to open its casino resort by July 2009. The second casino resort contract was awarded to Genting International, whose Sing $5.2 billion project includes a Universal Studios theme park and a huge outdoor marine park.
Singapore's deputy prime minister, S. Jayakumar, said at a news conference that Genting had provided"the most compelling proposal over all that best meets our economic and tourism objectives."
He added, "We wanted a large-scale family-oriented resort that would draw a large number of new visitors to Singapore."

Farther from Thailand shores, Macau of course has already carved a success-story, at least in terms of revenue. In 2006, the former Portuguese colony that was returned to China in 1999, said that its gambling revenue had soared 22 percent to $6.95 billion outstripping Las Vegas, that mecca of gambling.

In the light of all these Asian countries biting the bullet and taking their chances, the question on Thailand is increasingly changing from why to why not.

As a tourist resort destination, Phuket is a natural and perhaps the most high-profile candidate for a casino, perhaps even for Thailand's first.

And perhaps, the strongest case for having one here, apart from the jobs and revenue, is the infrastructure that could be a part of the package. Casinos cater to a high-spending bracket--a prime target of the TAT anyway--and one that places huge demands on the improvement of other facilities. Great roads, cleaner cities, music festivals, art and culture can be desirable off-shoots of the industry. The casinos can, through revenue, pay for all of these.

This could mean a blanket of superior infrastructure to cover even those who do not have the slightest interest in gambling.

Another strong case for casinos on Phuket is that this would be a perennial trade, with none of the vagaries of the seasonal tourism that currently prevails on the island. A year-round tourist magnet would ensure steady incomes, secure jobs.

On the other side of the atlas, another former Portuguese colony is beating all the odds. The first floating casino, the Caravela (operated by Ramada) has been cruising the River Mandovi in Goa, for years. A new floating casino, to be operated by the Leela group of hotels, is currently berthed at the Captain of Ports jetty, awaiting the governmental go-ahead.

But the coup de foudre--one that the local government vehemently denies having granting permission for-is an offshore casino with 'no-limits' tables, and touted as the 'biggest in South Asia', slated to open in Goa shortly.

Rumours have already made ripples in the press, about a 70-metre long Panamanian vessel named Maharaja Casino, costing $25 million, allegedly to be operated by Creative Gaming Solution, a subsidiary of Mumbai-based Pan India Network Infravest Pvt. Ltd., (Pinipl), the promoter of the Playwin lottery.

If the plan indeed goes through, the touristic value for Goa could hardly be over-stated. In such opportune company--and competition--then, one is inclined to wonder: can Thailand afford to miss out?

Stacked against

But can it afford to join? Should Thailand be riding the wave its neighbours are, simply to pursue the revenues without thought to the social and cultural impact of such a move?
The opposition will and has been strong. In a mainly Buddhist country, a vice like gambling is particularly frowned upon.

The arguments against gambling are many, and just like in the case of revenues, Thais don't have to look far to find them.

The murder-suicide in 1995 of Singapore national Simon Lee, who racked up $61,650 (USD) before his winnings caught up with him and he began asking friends for money to cover the $2,500 worth of gambling losses he accumulated not long after, showcases the grim picture that often accompanies gambling debts. Pursued by loan sharks, and swimming in debts, Lee landed to his death from a 12-storey building, while his wife and two children lay dead in their home, casting a shadow on Singapore's decision to open the casino-gates even before it was passed.

The examples, heartbreakingly enough, are too many to be listed. Before eventually conceding Singapore might have to adapt to a changed environment, Lee Kuan Yew, who governed Singapore as prime minister from 1965 to 1990, himself had been a strong opponent of legalising gambling in that country."I am dead set against gambling. I don't believe you can get rich by gambling,'' he said.
"It is a different Singapore from the one I governed,'' he conceded, before the first contract was awarded.

Thailand will have to make tough decisions, and it appears politicians are feeling the pinch. PM Samak's proposed solution; to instill a high entry fee for Thai nationals could be a practical solution, if implemented strictly.

However, in a country where drivers' licenses are bought and sold, what are the odds that Thai nationals would get in for far less money--and that this money would go into other coffers than those of the state?

On Phuket, the idea of legalising casinos is already hotly debated. Opposition has come from expected quarters. University professors and religious heads are appalled. Support has come from the usual pragmatic coterie: businessmen and policy-makers, and also from some surprising arenas. A senior police official told the Phuket Post that Phuket would probably benefit from casinos, if these were regulated with unprecedented vigour.

What is absent, and quite remarkably so, is a plan to counter gambling addictions and fall-outs whether from illegal or legalised gambling.

Whether Phuket, or Thailand, chews the chips or not, gambling, as the PM says, is already rampant. But where is the help for problem gamblers? Where are the hot-lines, the community centres and counselling that could help those who want to be helped?

If Phuket does, indeed decide that is is ready for casinos, the decision-makers would be well-advised to look beyond the pros and cons and also incorporate the tangential elements that could go a long way in preventing a social/cultural catastrophe. Indeed, the case for counselling already exists, without even the casinos.