Assignment 1- Governance in Singapore
1. Set up a blog and give your URL to your SS teacher/representative.
2. For this first assignment, you are to blog about your thoughts on the government.
(a) Using the information you have learnt from Chapter 5, you are to find a current policy that portrays any one of the principles of governance.
(b) Give your views on the policy that you have chosen.
3. Alternatively, you can choose to blog on problems that the government faec and should tackle. For example, the problem of elitism in Singapore.2.
The policy that i have chosen is the Singapore Integrated Resorts(IR). This policy portrays one of the good principles of the governance, being forward-looking, that is to plan ahead to meet the future needs of Singaporeans.
An Integrated Resort (IR) is a mixed-use development containing a casino. The term has also been used as a euphemism in Singapore to describe the casinos in particular, the opening casinos being a controversial issue among Singaporeans. To date, IR licenses have been awarded to Marina Bay Sands and Resorts World Sentosa. These are planned to be completed in 2009, and would be the first casinos in the country.
During a parliament session on 18 April 2005, Lee Hsien Loong, the prime minister of Singapore, announced the cabinet's decision to develop two integrated resorts in Marina South and Sentosa.
In regard to this, i believe that this project has both its pros and cons.
I think that the project can boost Singapore's tourism industry. Tourism in Asia is growing phenomenally, especially the traffic from China and India. Singapore's tourist numbers are up too, but we see warning signs of problems ahead. Our market share is declining (from 8% in the Asia Pacific region in 1998 to 6% in 2002). Tourists are spending less time in Singapore. They used to stay an average of about 4 days in 1991, but now they stay only for 3 days. In contrast, on average, they are staying for about 4 days in Hong Kong, 5 days in London and almost a week in New York City. We are losing attractiveness as a tourist destination. The feedback we have been getting is that Singapore is seen as unexciting. We have not been investing in tourism infrastructure projects that are crowd pullers. So there are too few things to do that hold the attention of the tourists. We are also facing intense competition from other destinations around the region, particularly from nearby Bangkok and hong kong, which has since also considered legalization of casinos in the wake of initiatives in Singapore. Even closer to home, Malaysia long had a legal casino cum theme park on Genting Highlands, which proved popular with Singaporean tourists. In addition to the casinos, the IRs will have other amenities including hotels, restaurants, shopping and convention centres, theatres, museums and theme parks. They attract hundreds of thousands of visitors per year. The great majority will not be there to gamble. They may be tourists, executives or businessmen, who go to enjoy the resort, or attend conventions or conferences. But within this large development and slew of activities, there is one small but essential part which offers gaming and which helps make the entire project financially viable. As a result, there is no need for government grants or subsidies for the IR. The investors will put in the money, and take the commercial risk.The industry is expected to invest five billion Singapore dollars in Integrated Resorts. By building the IRs in Singapore, 35,000 jobs are also expected to be created directly and indirectly.
However, on the other hand, although there may be economic merits to setting up a casino in Singapore, the social impact is not negligible. By making gaming more accessible and even glamorous, it could encourage more gambling and increase the risk of gaming addiction, getting more people into trouble and making more families suffer. A casino could also lead to undesirable activities like money laundering, illegal money lending and organised crime. Although one can try to mitigate these effects, the long term impact on social mores and attitudes is more insidious and harder to prevent. The second risk of allowing IRs is that we may tarnish the Singapore brand name. Our reputation, built up over decades, is one of our most precious assets. Internationally, Singapore is known as being clean, honest, safe, law abiding, a wholesome place to live and bring up a family. We must not let the IRs tarnish this brand name. Thirdly, the IRs will undermine the values of our population, especially amongst the young. Singapore has succeeded through hard work and perseverance, and never believing that there was a quick and easy way to get rich. It is critical that Singaporeans continue to have the right values, as individuals, as families and as a society, values that will help us make a living for ourselves, live upright lives, and endure as a nation. If IRs erode our work ethic, undermine our values of thrift and hard work, and encourage Singaporeans to believe that the way to success is to be lucky at the gaming tables, then we are in trouble. Lastly, there are also religious objections. The churches, the Buddhist and Hindu groups, as well as MUIS and Muslim groups have all stated their stands.
In conclusion, I support the government’s decision of building the IRs, of moving forward together, as long as they take note of the downsides of the project and try to minimize the damage done.
