Inside Asian Gaming

INSIDE ASIAN GAMING | December 2010 36 economic levers to boost foreign tourism receipts, not to relieve Singaporeans of their wages. Such exceptions granted to Malaysians could also encourage populist politicians in neighbouring Indonesia, the most populous Muslim country in the world, to push for a similar exclusion or limitation on their own citizens. And that in effect would amount to a low-key regional trade war. Singapore to impose a casino entrance fee on Malaysians and to limit each Malaysian to a maximum 50 trips to Singapore’s casinos per year. There is already rumour (so far unsubstantiated) that Singapore might raise the daily casino entry fee to price its own low- income citizens off the premises. There may be some political grandstanding in Mr Tang’s position. The population of Johor is predominantly Malay and predominantly Muslim. The state’s biggest economic development zone, Iskandar Malaysia just over the border from Singapore, has attracted around US$2 billion investment from the Middle East, including sovereign wealth funds in Dubai and Abu Dhabi. Even leaving aside any cultural and religious element to the casino issue, the People’s Republic of China has already set a precedent for a paternalistic approach to casino access. But it used visas rather than pricing as the mechanism. Under the PRC’s individual visit scheme, independent Chinese travellers can currently make a maximum of 12 trips per year to Macau. But Macau is part of China, albeit a semi- autonomous part under the ‘One Country Two Systems’ policy. Malaysia and Singapore are separate countries. Even with that political distinction, to outsiders it might not seem unreasonable for Malaysia to protect its people either by pricing the lower earners out of the Singapore casinos or limiting the number of trips they can make per year. But Malaysia is (in theory at least) a multi-party democracy, not a one-party state like China, and freedom of movement for its people is one of the pillars that support Malaysia’s political and economic system. There are political and cultural factors, however, that could sway the Singaporean government to be sympathetic to curbs on Malaysian gamblers. Until 1965, Singapore was actually part of Malaysia. She was expelled because of political differences with the federal government in Kuala Lumpur. Singapore, the city-state, is ethnically overwhelmingly a Chinese community (about 74% of residents are of Chinese descent), but takes care to stay on reasonable terms with its own Malay minority and the Malay majority over the border. A pipeline from Johor supplies just under 40% of Singapore’s water, and Malaysia has in the past used the threat of cutting off that supply to exert political pressure on Singapore. Significant tensions between the different ethnic groups sharing the Malay peninsula remain an important political issue. Were Singapore to agree to in some way limit Malaysians’ access to its casinos, though, it could cause significant damage to the government’s casino liberalisation strategy. That was precisely to c rea t e Malaysia’s Iskandar economic zone, just a few minutes drive across the causeway from Singapore Advertise with Inside Asian Gaming For advertising enquiries, please email: ads@asgam.com or call +853 2832 9980 The main gaming floor at Marina Bay Sands Feature