|
（作者）● Candy Mao
（前言）Having been stuck in limbo for many years, the widely concerned issue about whether Taiwan’s offshore island, Penghu, would open up to casino development has finally seen its answer! The second referendum held by Penghu County on October 15, 2016 ended with 26,598 votes against casino development and only 6219 for. More than 80% of the total votes opposed the establishment of tourist casinos, causing the proposal of transforming Penghu into a special tourism gaming zone to fail to pass. The Penghu residents utilized the second referendum to decide that this island does not need to rely on casinos to attract tourists. As for Matsu, which held its gaming referendum in 2012 and approved casino development, its initial hope for developing its tourism industry and giving monthly subsidies of NT$80,000 to its residents has vanished. Moreover, US-based Weidner Resort Development Inc., which strongly promoted the gaming industry development in Matsu at the time, is nowhere to be found now. Matsu’s gaming referendum only brought an empty dream. Is Taiwan really saying goodbye to casinos!?
.jpg)
（小标）Government holds anti-gambling stance
In 2009 the ruling party in the Taiwan legislature utilized “Class A Mobilization” to pass an amendment to the “Offshore Islands Development Act”, which allowed the establishment of casinos on the outlying islands, with a high number of 71 votes cast in favor. The move laid down the basis for the establishment of casinos on offshore islands. According to the provisions in Article 10-2, “before an offshore island may be opened to the establishment of tourist casinos, a local referendum must be held in accordance with the Referendum Act, and more than half of the valid votes cast in the referendum must be votes of approval.”
With such a backdrop, Penghu held its first gaming referendum on September 26, 2009. The side opposing casinos led with 3,962 votes, winning with 56.44% of the total valid ballots cast against casino development. According to the Referendum Act of Taiwan, the same proposal can be raised after three years and another referendum can be held. Therefore, seven years after the first referendum, under the initiation of the “Penghu Internalization Promotion Alliance”, Penghu held its second gaming referendum.
On the evening before the Penghu referendum, President Tsai Ing-wen of Taiwan, who is also chairwoman of the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), reiterated the party’s unchanged stance at a DPP Central Standing Committee meeting on October 12. Her remark “gaming is not the only way to boost local development” dropped a bombshell on the referendum which was originally viewed as a tight race. According to Spokesperson Hsu Kuo-yung of the Executive Yuan, the DPP opposed gambling before it became the ruling party and has been holding a very clear stance; President and DPP chairwoman Tsai Ing-wen also emphasized again that the DPP was against gambling when it was an opposition party and remains opposed to gambling when it is in power. He noted that the referendum is an act of people directly practicing democracy and the Executive Yuan absolutely respects it; however, Penghu possesses abundant natural resources and tourism resources in particular can be further developed like snorkeling, whale watching and other maritime recreational businesses. He also mentioned that the island could move in many other development directions like green energy, wind power and the black tide power generation proposed by Vice President Chen Yang-yi of National Sun Yat-sen University.
Whether Taiwan opens up to casino development hinges on the central government’s legislation and attitude.
（小标）Positive and negative opinions on casino development
The pro-casino “Penghu Internationalization Promotion Alliance” held the “Penghu residents courageously come out to fight for their well-being” parade before the referendum took place. Organized with a mood of preparing for a celebrative event, the parade aimed to stress that opening up to casino development would allow the introduction of legal “international integrated resorts” with tourism gaming operation set-ups, which could help the tourism industry of Penghu upgrade, create tax revenues and solve various issues like ecological, medical care, employment, transport and government debt problems.
The convener of the Alliance, Mr. Chen Meng, said that the “international integrated resorts” would adopt the Singapore model and this is currently the development trend across the globe. He pointed out that Korea’s Yeongjong Island has followed suit and if Penghu gave up on casino development easily, it would be much more difficult to get on the road of internationalization in the future and getting ranked on the list of “international islands” would not be within the foreseeable future.
The anti-casino development side believes that the gaming industry already belongs to a sunset industry and it is the same in Korea and the US. Although casinos could make money in the beginning, they would end up declining later. Therefore, Penghu does not need casinos and all sectors of society should fight against the gaming industry together to leave beautiful nature and culture to future generations. The convener of the Penghu Youth Alliance, Mr. Sheng Yi-che, noted that he would continue pushing the congress to revise laws and abolish the casino act in an attempt to make the issue about whether Penghu should embrace casino development a thing of the past. He said that the casino issue has wasted years of time for people and the land and house prices in Penghu have been pushed up, so it is now very difficult for young people to own a house. Furthermore, Penghu spent the referendum budget of NT$7 million to answer the question, which was already answered seven years ago in vain.
（小标）Matsu sees no dawn of casino gaming
Another island of Taiwan, Matsu, which belongs to Lienchiang County, held a gaming referendum in July 2012 after Penghu’s first referendum vetoed the establishment of casinos. With 1,795 votes supporting and 1,341 votes opposing, the referendum in Matsu gave a green light to casino development with a slight lead. The former Commissioner Yang Sui-sheng of Lienchiang County believed that the referendum result represented “the Matsu residents’ wish to improve the island’s transport network by casino development”. “Weidner Resort” even promised a monthly subsidy of NT$80,000 for each Matsu resident if profit reached a certain level, which triggered the trend of moving household registration to Matsu among a good number of people with household registered in the main island Taiwan.
A resident of Lienchiang County, Mr. Tsao, said that pro-gambling residents in Matsu generally understand that gambling may bring negative influences and possible damage. However, due to its geographically remote location, Matsu is in a tough situation in terms of industry development and transport network and the central government of Taiwan has not attached much importance to these issues. “To attract resources, the casino gaming supporters chose to wager their hope on the gaming industry,” added Mr. Tsao. However, the central government’s gaming act draft has been in limbo and the investor interested in the project could not afford to continue wasting money and finally went away. Many gaming supporters were let down and the gaming referendum issue has also become a sensitive topic. Mr. Tsao believed that if the gaming referendum in Penghu passed, Penghu and Matsu could stand together to fight for a speedy passage of the gaming act in the legislature.
Lienchiang County Commissioner Liu Tseng-ying commented in a low-key fashion, “if the central government has not passed laws or acts, local governments have no control at all.” He said that he had some ideas at that time, but they could not be carried out because of being hindered by the central government laws and policies. Therefore, in spite of the policy and subsidy being approved and the land planned out, until now all have been in limbo and have made zero progress. Though the referendum in Matsu gave a “yes” to gaming development, Matsu still has not ushered in the establishment of Taiwan’s first casino.
.jpg)
The outlying islands such as Penghu, Matsu and Kinmen have once been viewed as the areas in Taiwan that might open up to the establishment of casinos.
（小标）Opinions remain divided after final verdict from referendum
Regarding the second referendum’s result, chairwomen Huang Hsiu-hui of the Penghu County Guesthouse Development Association, stressed that she is proud of being a native of Penghu and said “again we utilize the votes to veto gaming and protect the value of Penghu.” CEO Chuang Guang-hui of the Penghu Internationalization Promotion Alliance pointed out the main reason for the significant disparity between the votes disagreeing and agreeing was “the maximization of the casino issue”. Furthermore, the insufficient publicity of international integrated resorts created misconceptions among the residents of Penghu.
Terry Gou of Foxconn Group expressed his opinion on the gaming industry in 2013. He suggested that compared with establishing a special gaming zone in Matsu, it was better to select an area in New Taipei City or other parts of northern Taiwan to develop the gaming industry as a key platform to facilitate tourism, travel, consumption, shopping, technology exhibitions and meetings. Using Las Vegas in the US as an example, he noted that gambling revenue accounted for less than one fourth of the overall revenue in the city; the real income came from the organization of exhibitions, large-scale conventions, shopping and consumption, which could drive employment.
The topic of Taiwan opening up to tourism casinos has attracted world-class operators to express their interest in investment. A good number of casino representatives from Malaysia, the US and Macau visited Taiwan or participated in the symposiums held by the Taiwan government. However, Taiwan has experienced its third democratic transfer of power so far and the second gaming referendum in Penghu vetoed casinos. The Penghu Internationalization Promotion Alliance openly announced that unless other groups are willing to propose again, the Alliance shall not facilitate a referendum on this issue again in the future. Judging the current sentiment in society and the stance of the party in power, the answer to whether casinos will be opened up seems to be very obvious.
※ The article is published in the GTI Magazine Issue No. 148 in November, 2016
|
