Inside Asian Gaming

IAG MAY 2021年5月 亞博匯 45 專欄 entities in Sydney, Melbourne and Perth, and the parent company itself, has been done by Bergin, it may be expected that Finkelstein will devote considerable time to addressing Term of Reference D: “Whether it is in the public interest for Crown Melbourne to continue to hold the casino license in Victoria.” This is the point at which the difference between a Royal Commission and an inquiry commissioned by a casino regulator becomes material. Victoria’s Casino Control Act requires the VCGLR to conduct periodic reviews of, among other things, Crown Melbourne’s suitability to hold the casino license and whether or not it is in the public interest that the casino license should continue in force. The Act defines public interest as something to be determined by the regulator having regard to “the creation and maintenance of public confidence and Itmaybe expected that Finkelstein will devote considerable time to addressing … “Whether it is in the public interest for Crown Melbourne to continue to hold the casino license in Victoria.” 可以預期F i nke l ste i n將集中時間應 對……「皇冠墨爾本繼續在維多利亞州持 有賭牌是否符合公共利益。」 調 查皇冠墨爾本、由Ray Finkelstein領導的皇 家調查委員會的任命和職權範圍於2021年2 月22日在維多利亞州的憲報上公布。在此三 個星期前，新南威爾斯州所進行、由Patricia Bergin領導的調查報告發表，指出皇冠悉尼 （Crown Sydney）並不是巴蘭加魯的受限制賭牌之合資格持有 機構，其母公司皇冠度假酒店集團亦不適合擔任該賭牌公司的緊 密聯繫單位。Bergin報告中所指出的大部分行為都與該墨爾本娛 樂場的資格性有所抵觸，該娛樂場由皇冠集團另一子公司皇冠墨 爾本所營運。 兩項調查的一個主要不同地方是，Bergin由新南州獨立酒業 和博彩管理局所委任的，Finkelstein則由維州總督所委任的。委 員會主席Finkelstein將向維州議會匯報，該議會負責公共政策之 制定，以及發展及通過使之生效的法律框架。維州博彩及酒類監 管委員會（VCGLR）在此事中遭邊緣化，而事實上，Finkelstein須 根據調查結果或建議，考慮是否應更改VCGLR下的法律框架。 由於Bergin就釐定、調查和表述皇冠以及其在悉尼、墨爾本