Former prime minister inquires as to who will actually benefit and who will experience.
Abhisit Vejjajiva, a former prime minister, has criticized the act that calls for the construction of included leisure complexes that include gambling, citing concerns about the social and economic effects.
Before the draft bill was scheduled to be read in legislature, Mr. Abhisit spoke with the Bangkok Post. That was initially scheduled for today but was afterwards put off.
He issued a warning about the potential for a rise in gambling addiction as a result of growing cultural issues like crime and debts. His opinion was that promoting playing both online and in brick-and-mortar games was sending the wrong message to the general public.
He claimed that playing frequently adds to the overall economic issue by creating a lack of fiscal discipline and mounting debt.
A state that has already instituted a policy of giving out money without condition also ran the risk of enticing more people to gamble, according to Mr. Abhisit.
The bill, according to the government, may increase tourism and draw more people to man-made sights. However, Mr. Abhisit claimed that when the government made its policy speech to congress, it never made any explicit notice of casinos.
Rather, it used the term “integrated entertainment difficult” as a tactical move to conceal the real intention of establishing legal casinos because officials knew the majority of the general public would object, he said.
Any game may be excluded from any such complex, but the proposed law requires that it be included, according to Mr. Abhisit.
He claimed that the lack of games has not discouraged international visitors from visiting the nation so much.
Because there are no casinos in Thailand, he said,” I don’t think there are many international visitors who have chosen to stay there.”
He questioned how much money casinos had put into the business on other purchases and said it was improbable that they would become a great tourist magnet.
While gambling generate jobs and tax profits, they also carry risks, such as money laundering and international crime, which Thailand has already struggled to manage, according to Mr. Abhisit.
We recently stepped up our crackdown on call center gangs along the border ( with Myanmar and Cambodia ) and gambling websites. All of them “have some sort of network to casinos,” he claimed.
” I cannot see what the new document act may bring about.” I can only see the drawbacks, he said.
He even criticized the policy for skipping other crucial social issues, like focusing on rehabilitation or gambling prevention.
Additionally, he expressed worry over the lack of transparency with regard to the game costs.
He claimed that a government-appointed committee would have too little authority over zoning, tax collection, and licensing matters, which could lead to corruption and simply benefit a select few people.
Mr. Abhisit said he believes legalizing gambling may only make things worse despite the government’s says that it would reduce improper gambling.
There are signs that society may be a wonderful danger from online gambling, he said.
He cited the Singapore case, which is frequently used as a case study of successful blackjack management, saying that perhaps developed nations have experienced damaging social effects from gambling.
He warned that China, which has a strong anti-gambling policy among its members, was apologise for a visit to Thailand, which would have a significant impact on the country’s economy.
He also questioned the president’s sense of urgency in passing the act, citing the possibility that vested interests were to blame.
” I don’t really understand why this coverage seems so rushed in comparison to other problems,” I said.
When questioned about whether the probable bill would be passed and put into effect, he claimed the public’s opposition and scrutiny from the Senate and political parties could put it off.
” Yet the revised draft returned by the Council of State includes new requirements requiring public hearings and affect assessments. He claimed that these procedures may slow the passage of the bill while the current administration is in power.
The previous premier said that while coalition parties have certainly opposed the costs, they have never actively supported it.
He speculated that the decision might be to wait and see, depending on how the common reacts or what will be said during the first reading of the first reading political discussion.
Further adjustments are anticipated after that, he said, if or when the document costs is approved.
Mr. Abhisit claimed that a 30-year maximum on the licence’s duration, which is already set at 30 years, may help lessen any bad effects it might have on society, even if the draft bill is ultimately passed into law.