S. Iswaran: It's about law and order, and social concerns

Next month, Parliament debates the Remote Gambling Bill. Second Minister for Home Affairs and Trade and Industry S. Iswaran, 52, tells Charissa Yong why the Government wants to draw a line in the sand on online gambling. The official point man for all things F1 here also talks about the race's future.
The Straits Times, 27 Sep 2014

Why is there now a need for the Remote Gambling Bill?

The growing reach of the Internet, mobile bandwidth, and smart devices means many people now carry a computer in their pocket. This has fuelled a global surge in online gaming. Because of that, several countries reviewed their legislation.

We are no different and need to make sure we have the regulatory levers in place to deal with online gaming, before it becomes a big problem. The laws we have governing gaming today - the Common Gaming Houses Act and the Betting Act - were enacted well before there was such a thing as the Internet, (as) the fact they talk about gaming houses tells you.


What are the concerns the Bill seeks to address?

One is about law and order. Because these operations are transnational, there is a real risk of association with criminal activities and money-laundering.

The other is the social concern. Because online gambling is ubiquitous and accessible, you don't have the usual safeguards you might put in place, say, for example, to bar the underaged from a casino. The vulnerable are more exposed to this, especially the young, because they are more tech-savvy and better able to use technology to gamble online.


Some industry watchers say the rise in online gambling can be linked to the opening of the two casinos here in 2010. What do you make of this?

I don't agree. Online gambling is prevalent all over the world, even in places where there are no casinos. It's linked to the fact that the Internet and mobile bandwidth have become readily available. If you want to be involved in something like this, the barrier to entry is almost zero. That's what is driving this trend.


With all the technology that exists to help people circumvent the restrictions, how effective do you think the Bill will be?

The proposed Bill will prohibit advertising, payments, and Internet access to certain online gambling sites. Each on its own is already quite useful. Collectively, I think they'll be quite disruptive to this kind of activity.

But it doesn't mean it's a silver bullet. There is no such solution because technology is dynamic and it will evolve. And there always will be someone who finds a way around technical barriers.

But if we're able to put these measures in place, it will send a very strong signal of where we stand on the issue, and significantly impede those who have a mind to unlawfully gamble. Most people will take their cue from that.


What would you consider a successful outcome of the Bill?

If we succeed in deterring operators with criminal associations or otherwise from targeting the Singapore market with their online gaming products, and if we succeed in educating Singaporeans about the dangers of this kind of gambling, then we would have made a significant impact.


How would we avoid driving such activities underground, where they become harder to regulate?

An outright ban may seem a very straightforward position. But it means, as many countries have recognised, that these activities will go underground. And the risk of criminal involvement will increase.

Combining the proposed restrictions with the possibility of having a tightly regulated exemption, which is a provision in the Bill, can help to mitigate this risk.


Some critics have said that this ban on remote gambling is the Government reacting to what it cannot tax. Allowing an exemption can be read as a way to raise revenue. What is your response?

This is not about trying to raise revenue. If our objective was raising revenue, our approach would have been very different.

There are other regimes in the world like Britain, for example, which has many licensed online gaming operators. That's a revenue-raising model.

But our primary objective is to prohibit online gaming. So, it is not a foregone conclusion that there will be an exemption just because there's a provision to do so.


What would an operator exempted from the prohibition here look like?

They must meet the criteria spelt out in the legislation. For example, they must be based in Singapore, be not for profit, channel their surpluses to charitable causes, and have a very good track record of compliance.

Even if they demonstrate all this, we'll have to think about what can be allowed. And even if we do, it must be very tightly controlled and subject to a range of important conditions, like having social safeguards to protect chronic gamblers.

But this is further downstream and we're jumping ahead.


Do you gamble?

No, I don't (although) I've been known to have the odd friendly wager with some friends on a World Cup soccer match.







In 2012, Singapore signed a five-year renewal deal with Formula One to run the race here until 2017. Is a third five-year contract on the cards?

It's too early to say. We still have three years to go on the current contract, and the situation may be quite different by then. We'll have a better sense closer to the time.

But I can share with you how we went about it before, and the Government will probably use a similar method in the future. We looked at the potential benefits. Some are economic. We estimate induced tourism spending to be about $100 million, which benefits sectors like hospitality, retail and F&B in particular.

There is also the intangible benefit of branding Singapore. When people see Singapore, the city at night, its vibrancy captivates them.They then think, why don't we visit Singapore? Perhaps do business there.

When the time comes, we'll have to evaluate all these factors and others like the external environment, because there are more cities hosting the F1.


How has Singapore's position changed between the negotiation for the first contract and now?

When we first started the F1 in 2008, we were new to the whole thing so it wasn't as clear what we could bring to the table. It was clearer what F1 brought to us.

When we renewed five years later, we had become an important part of the F1 calendar. We are considered one of the top three races in the world. (F1 boss) Mr Bernie Ecclestone calls us a crown jewel, and those who know him know that he doesn't give away praise so easily.


This year, Bahrain had its first night race, which was once Singapore's ace in the hole. What was your reaction to that?

You must expect that if you succeed in something, then there will be others who seek to compete and put forward something similar. It was a matter of time.

But our entire case does not rest on being a night race. There's a lot more to us than that.

Our race is distinctive because we've combined it with lifestyle elements like large-scale concerts and the Grand Prix season of activities, as well as business elements, like being a platform for corporate networking and conferences.

The involvement of locals in the race, like the 1,000 ITE (Institute of Technical Education) students, is also what makes Singapore's F1 special, in my opinion.


What's the big plan to grow tourism for Singapore?

We can't just keep adding on more numbers in terms of visitors. So our strategy is to focus on quality tourism and yield. What we mean by that is that at the same time we want (visitors) to stay longer, and spend more.

(And) not just building more tourism infrastructure, but also enhancing the visitor experience through the software, such as events, activities, and service quality.

Take New York. It's not building attractions every year, yet it attracts a lot of tourists because of the activities and buzz it generates. Why can't we as well?


Are mega attractions and events, like F1 and integrated resorts, Singapore's way forward?

We do need good large-scale projects from time to time to refresh our tourism landscape. But there is a place for smaller-scale ventures, too. STB (Singapore Tourism Board) has the Kickstart Fund to support innovative efforts and lifestyle events, which may not be big but have the potential to contribute to tourism. We want people to come up with novel ideas to experiment with.

Pop-up dining ideas or retail ideas, things like that. It adds to the variety and vibrancy of our tourism scene.


As part of your work driving tourism in Singapore, you rub shoulders with celebrities and attend glamorous events. Is that your scene?

It's part of the job, not something I crave. You have to keep things in perspective. If I have any delusions of grandeur, I think my family (he is father of three children aged 17, 15 and 11) will bring me back down to earth very quickly.


Are you still excited by the glitz and glamour of the F1 races?

(Laughs) What was very fun for me was the Robbie Williams concert this year. My wife and I wanted to go. It was pouring, so we put on the poncho half the time and had the umbrella half the time. It was a great experience. I told people it's like having Glastonbury (a famous annual music festival in England) here.

THE SUPPER CLUB | S. ISWARAN
It’s about law and order, and social concerns
Supper with S Iswaran -RazorTV