Inside Asian Gaming

IAG MAR 2021年3月 亞博匯 73 專欄 held seven rounds of hearings and observed that the damage done by misconduct to individuals and to the overall health and reputation of the financial services industry had been large. The scale of wrongdoing the FSRC revealed and the extent of its impact, including substantial consumer harm, is shocking. There is limited utility in attempting to compare the monstrous scale of the FSRC’s task and the scope of human misery wrought by the misconduct it surfaced, with the AML and corporate governance related shortcomings disclosed by the NSW Casino Inquiry. Suffice to say latent curiosity remains about the threshold for suitability in financial services. The Gaming and Wagering Commission (GWC) of Western Australia (WA) has also now announced it is recommending that State’s Minister for Racing, Gaming and Liquor, establish its own independent inquiry under the Casino Control Act 1984 (WA). The reason for another independent Inquiry, armed with the powers of a Royal Commission, seems to be in response to advice from theWA State’s Solicitor’s Office that underWestern Australian legislation, the GWC could not rely on the Bergin Inquiry to make findings in relation to Crown Perth. It seems political momentum has determined that the showmust go on (a Royal Commission has also been announced in Victoria, home of CrownMelbourne). Gambling occupies a strange position in the Australian cultural and political environment. Australian state and territory governments accrue sizeable taxation from gambling revenue, with the NSW Government forecasting AU$2.7 billion in gambling and betting taxation for 2020-21, up to AU$3 billion in 2023-24. Despite this sizeable contribution to public revenue, or perhaps because of it, the gambling sector is mostly received as an important but unpalatable stakeholder, sans the outward political closeness and media opportunities familiar to other less complicated industries. 律。即使是合法，亦未能達到公眾期望。FSRC舉行了七輪聽證，並 留意到這些過失對於不同人士以及金融服務行業的整體健康和 聲譽都造成很大的傷害。 FSRC所揭露過失的程度以及其影響，包括對於客戶的嚴重傷 害，實在令人震驚。如果要嘗試把FSRC那龐然的調查範圍和當中 發現的過失所做成的人間慘劇，與新南威爾斯娛樂場調查所發現 的那些和反洗黑錢及企業管理有關的錯誤作對比的話，實在沒有 太大意義。但可以說，很多人依然對於提供金融服務的合資格門 檻有著好奇。 西澳的博彩及投注委員會(Gaming and Wagering Commis- sion, GWC)亦已宣佈，建議該州的賽馬博彩及酒業大臣根據該州 於1984年訂立的《娛樂場控制法》開展其獨立調查。而展開另一場 獨立調查，並且讓該調查擁有皇家委員會權力的原因，似乎是要 回應在西澳向政府提供法律服務的State’s Solicitor’s Office的 意見，該意見指出，根據西澳的法律，GWC不能依賴新南威爾斯的 調查結果去對於皇冠柏斯作出裁決。似乎在政治上的推動力，還 是希望看見這場大戲繼續上演(一個皇家委員會亦將在皇冠墨爾 本的所在州份維多利亞進行調查)。 博彩在澳洲的文化及政治環境中佔了一個奇怪的角色。澳洲 的各州及領地政府都從博彩收入中累積了頗為豐厚的稅收，當中 新南威爾斯政府更預計，在2020/21年度會從博彩及投注的徵稅 中得到27億澳元，並且在2023/24年度上升至30億澳元。雖然博 彩界對於公共財政帶來了一定的貢獻，也可能因為這個原因，這 界別很多時候被視為一個重要但令人難以接受的利害關係人，並 且沒有和其他行業一樣與為政者有那麼緊密的聯繫，以及在傳媒 方面有那麼多正面曝光的機會 。