Extract from Parliament Report (20 April 2005):
(Emphasis mine)
The Minister of State for Foreign Affairs (Mr Zainul Abidin Rasheed): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, thank you for allowing me to join in this discussion.
Sir, the MM has spoken, and with such force, and we all know it is not easy to disagree with the Minister Mentor. But I think MM will also be one person who will agree that concerns remain and it will be very difficult actually to convince those who disagree with the idea of having casinos or IRs. But this is not a small number, and we have to find a way to make sure that we will not end up dividing our Singapore society. When MM speaks, many listen, not only in Singapore, the region, but all over the world. And MM asked what signals are we sending to the world, to investors and non-investors alike. But I would also like to ask what signals do we understand from this discussion? Do we really understand the signals which I think the Government is sending to us Singaporeans about the change that has taken place, about the challenges, the elements of competition, with emerging China and India, and what other opportunities and options do we have to make Singapore to continue to succeed and prosper?
I think our discussion is also drawing a lot of attention across the causeway in Malaysia. Many Malaysian media, newspapers, television stations, even leaders, have responded to this. Many are positive, some negative, some even cynical. And for those who are positive, they agree that the IRs will be good for tourism in the region. I was told that even the Chairman of the tourism board and the Secretary-General of the Tourism Ministry was quoted on CNA last night about growing the regional tourism pie, and I am sure this is in fact the reason the Singapore Government has opted for this approach to IRs, and this is in fact our hope too.
Let me quote the Secretary-General of the Chinese Chamber of Commerce and Industry, Mr Ng Yeow Song, who said that the Singapore Government was probably keeping up with the current trend to attract more tourists to the republic. He said, in fact, Johor could also benefit from it if Johor were to protect its environment, ie, it would raise the state's tourism potential. Also, the President of the Malaysian Chinese Tourism Association, Mr Chay Ng, felt that the impact of Singapore IRs
on Malaysia would be insignificant. Instead, it would probably boost Malaysia's tourist industry. He said tour operators should view the matter with foresight and should not be close-minded. To quote him, "Tour operators, including the Tourism Ministry need not worry about the issue but should instead face it with an open mind." So I would also like to urge our Singaporeans to approach this issue of IRs with an open mind.
But let me say at the outset that, as a Muslim, my position has to be no for religious considerations. But I am troubled in the sense that I live in an environment where it is a secular society, it is multi-racial and multi-religious. Can one community dictate the needs and decisions of the others, as Minister Yaacob Ibrahim has said on Monday? I think we have to be pragmatic, realistic and rational in our approach towards this issue.
I am also troubled in the sense that when I look around the world, I do see quite a number of Muslim countries - Malaysia, Cairo, Morocco - have casinos. But, at the same time, I do not see them coming out of a situation, becoming so immoral as a society, so degrading as a society. They also use that as a tool to attract tourists to their countries. I think many of us also realise that in fact, some of the best gamblers, if you like, those who patronise casinos all over the world, are Muslims. They may be good customers to the casinos but bad examples or models for the Muslim community.
Sir, for sure, we Singaporeans have been proud of our safe, clean and green image. That is something worth fighting for to upkeep. The question now is whether we are going to soil our image and go amber with IRs, what with the casinos thrown in. Risks are there for sure, especially the understandable concerns regarding the increased social ills, or even increase in crimes related to gambling. Clearly, some Singaporeans who are sincerely opposed to having casinos in Singapore will be disappointed and they might even say that there is no point in discussing the issue anymore as it looks like 'head I win, tail you lose' for the Government. But to these fellow Singaporeans, Muslims and non-Muslims alike, I appeal to them to keep their minds open and see how the decision on IRs could be turned into a win-win situation for Singapore. Rest assured that judging from PM and Ministers' speeches and assurances, those concerns expressed have not completely fallen on deaf ears.
Sir, undoubtedly, the decision to go IRs was not an easy one for Singapore. It took Singapore 40 years to do so. Surely, when we became independent, with so scarce natural resources, a casino would have been an easy choice. After all, Singapore was and is at the geographical crossroads of Asia. It would have been a convenient oasis for one. But no, Singapore, thanks to our pioneering leaders of independent Singapore, Mr Lee Kuan Yew and his strong views, in particular, avoided that option. Be it industrialisation, import substitution, export promotion, assembly of components, simple manufacturing, high technology, life sciences, financial services and developing Singapore as medical and educational hubs, we have been there. Why then now? In many eyes, this is a drastic change in position as far as casinos are concerned.
Is the economy that bad? Are we throwing in the towels with competition through the tested ways? Are we lost on ideas to fight competition from China and India and other emerging economies? Or indeed, are the IRs our new additional tool to meet those challenges? I believe the latter is the reason why our Government has chosen to do so. We need all hands on deck and all tools possible to meet the new challenges of globalisation and the new wave of competition confronting us. It is a new world that demands a new and creative approach to meet them.
Obviously, I am not saying, at all costs, especially the social costs, which many Singaporeans are justly concerned about. However, I trust most Singaporeans will be reassured by the approach taken by Government in tackling the issue. We have heard the assurance given by the Minister for Home Affairs, Mr Wong Kan Seng, who himself had shared with us his concerns and what measures his Ministry will embark upon to tackle the crime angle. The package announced by Minister Vivian Balakrishnan to work with FSCs and community organisations will also help. To those who believe that the Government should not throw the problem arising from gambling to the community they should ask themselves whether in fact that is the right attitude. We face the challenges of making Singapore to continue to succeed and prosper together and we can and should handle the fallouts, if any, together too.
To quote a friend, Mr Ahmad Isa Rahim, "After hearing PM and the other Ministers spoke, especially Mr Wong Kan Seng, I am convinced that the Government is sincere in tackling the social cost for the IRs." He said it was a good start. He, like many other Muslim Singaporeans, and many other Singaporeans too, eg, Catholics and those who do not profess a religion, are also against it. But he is willing to accept why the Government had to make that decision, as long as we are prepared to tackle the problems that might arise.
The sincerity is very clear. Here in Singapore, it is not a case of us going for IRs because we want to benefit a certain group or certain individuals with the kind of opportunities for development of the casinos. Here, I think the basic principle with which the Government has approached this issue is how do we use IRs to the advantage of Singaporeans and Singapore in general. That is for the benefit of all. But having said that, we recognise the problems that might arise. We accept the concerns which many Singapore have raised and we should tackle them collectively.
Clearly, many Muslims will also be opposed to it but I believe that most Muslim Singaporeans would be able to understand that this is part of the reality of living in a plural and secular society.
I am also confident that Muslim Singaporeans, even if they are against the idea, would understand the thinking behind Government's move and not confuse the casino issue with the IRs. I know they are inter-related, but while Muslims should choose not to work at the casinos, they should not deny themselves the job opportunities that will be created through the wider concept of IRs.
Personally, I believe that if I expect others to respect my faith, it is morally and spiritually right for me to give my neighbours and friends, who do not see it as wrong to have casinos in Singapore and IRs in general, the respect and space for them to live life as they chose.
Having said that, we should not take lightly the differences that have emerged over the issue. Many Singaporeans, I believe, will be reassured by the approach taken by the PM to reach out to community and religious organisations to explain further the Government decision and to encourage them to work together with the Government in tackling the issue and the problems that might arise.
We must not allow the decision to go IRs divide the society. The painstaking efforts we have taken to make Singapore a more cohesive society should not be put at risk because of this issue. I would also like to urge community and religious organisations to respond positively to PM's call and work together for the common benefit of our Singapore. This is a win-win formula we cannot afford to lose. We must work together, whatever the challenges. Make this a "Uniquely Singapore" experiment. We have experimented with many ideas and projects which others even shudder to think about - some very controversial policies which we have initiated and followed on earlier on in our independence but proven to be right later on. But with the need for us to constantly watch what are the challenges and demands in terms of fine-tuning and adjustments that are required to make sure that our initial objective of the good for Singapore is not lost.
Let this work too, not only in terms of material gains but also in our managing its social costs.
No comments:
Post a Comment