By Nur Ashikin Louis and Karen Bong
KUCHING, May 9: If Sarawak decides to build a casino at the site of the Borneo Highlands Resort, will it escape its predecessor’s fate of becoming a white elephant?
A recent article by DayakDaily on May 6 stirred a lively exchange among our readers on our social media channels on the idea of a gaming centre in Sarawak. With the majority expressing skepticism, their concerns primarily revolved around the economic viability, sustainability, social implications, and impact on the natural environment of such a venture.
It is worth noting that while casinos in other countries have tasted success, the uncertainty surrounding Sarawak’s ability to replicate the same outcome has cast doubts on the idea’s potential.
The nearly 100 comments left by readers highlighted a number of crucial questions about the viability and impact of building a casino in Sarawak.
One responder with the username of Ze Phyr emphasised that a comprehensive market analysis is crucial to understand demand, target audience, their preferences and potential market size, before proceeding with the construction of a casino.
“Do not depend on the people of Sarawak alone. We will only go once or twice. Look at the many malls in the city that have become ghost towns. Let’s just hope that the casino would not be deserted and become ‘sarang hantu’ (abandoned). Please consider this factor.”
This includes considering both domestic and international tourists, as well as creating a compelling value proposition that goes beyond mere gambling. This comment served as a reminder that the success of any establishment, including a casino, relies on continuous efforts to attract visitors and adaptation to evolving market dynamics.
Another responder, Gabriel Walter, questioned the extent to which the local population can truly benefit economically from a casino that makes profit from gambling losses from non-Muslim locals, while a significant portion of taxes would go to the federal government.
“So we are taking Sarawakian population money and handing it to the Federal government and also non-Sarawakian companies. You don’t rehabilitate the failed Borneo Highland (Resort) with money you get from gamblers who are your local population.”
Another reader, Kelvin Goh, opined the government is looking at an integrated resort with a host of tourism attractions and offerings like theme park, golf course, hotels, tours, restaurants, spa, theatres and shopping complexes that would benefit the supply and services chain, but Gabriel argued that Sarawak can consider a comprehensive entertainment and leisure centre without the inclusion of a casino, just like Disneyland or Universal Studios.
“If building all those peripheral infrastructure is money-making, they could have done it without having to build the casino,” Gabriel wrote, adding that a casino should not be disguised as the “anchor money-making business” for such ventures.
Reader Shew Lewd agreed that such a venture should be approached with caution and responsibly, highlighting the need to evaluate the suitability for such a centre to be built in Sarawak, given the potential negative impact, including social issues and crime.
“Yes, it can create jobs and boost tourism, but at what cost? Will it have a positive or a negative effect on the population of Sarawak as a whole? That’s why I say why not do something more family-oriented like what you see at Bukit Tinggi, Cameron Highlands etc?”
As for reader Edward Henry, he raised concerns about gangs, international syndicates and organised crime setting “camps” in Puncak Borneo that would have potential social and security implications in the Bidayuh-majority area, if a casino were to be established.
“You can open (the casino) but don’t do it at Puncak Borneo where the Bidayuh lives.”
For reader Michael Lee Chion Hung, it was a question of sustainability, especially considering the relatively small number of foreign visitors coming to Sarawak.
“Unless the resort including the casino could have enough business volume, no organisation or investor could sustain losses over the years,” he said, adding that maintaining a positive image for Sarawak’s forward planning is essential, and economic sustainability is a critical aspect of that.
The impact on the natural environment is another crucial aspect that reader Michael Moh highlighted as he believes that Sarawak, which boasts breathtaking landscapes and is renowned for its rich biodiversity, is a significant tourist attraction in its own right.
“Can’t imagine a city which depends on eco-tourism and rich in flora and fauna because of our huge rainforest now embarking on a casino to destroy our beautiful city.
“Why can’t we have a fully set up family theme park? Our current seaside resort at Santubong is not even catering for the locals. Their room rates are priced from RM300 onward. Go for something with the Club Med concept. Seems the tourism authority is running dry of ideas.”
However, there are also those who are supportive of the casino idea due to its potential economic benefits and tourism opportunities that such a development could bring to the region.
Reader James Daniel sees the upside given that gambling exists in various forms in many places, even without dedicated casinos.
“If it attracts tourists, and provides jobs to the people in the area, why not. Gambling is everywhere with or without casinos. Don’t see Singapore or Pahang going down the toilet (lead to negative outcomes for an area).”
Reader Joseph T Setu pointed out that gambling is personal choice and individuals are not forced to gamble.
This argument was also backed by another reader Belansai Laga who said that humans are capable of thinking and they will gamble based on their ability.
“Just do it (the casino). (This) would create job employment to the local folks and the surrounding areas will also develop. The Puncak Borneo Road also will always be maintained. Turn it into a resort too. At least visitors from abroad can come to Malaysia, especially to Sarawak and Kuching.”
Reader EG Elfrin believes that a casino can become a stepping stone for other businesses to be developed and strengthen the supply chains for farmers, breeders, fishermen and homestays, apart from creating more employment for the next 20 to 30 years down the road.
“I will become a part of the supply chain and not gamble.”
Reader Vliv Vliv said at least taxes collected from the casino can be used for maintenance of the Pan Borneo Highway and the extra revenue can go towards building roads to longhouses in the interior of Sarawak.
Meanwhile, reader Koh Eng Eng argued: “Casino you guys complain. But ‘Wukong’ (a form of gambling), you guys don’t complain. Dragon, you guys don’t complain. Quick rich scheme you guys don’t complain.”
What is clear is that Sarawak’s unique circumstances, economic conditions, and socio-cultural fabric warrant careful consideration when evaluating the feasibility of a casino.
It is imperative that any decision made by the Sarawak government regarding the building of a casino at the site of the Borneo Highlands Resort takes into account the concerns and perspectives of the public, as well as long-term impact on the region’s economy, society and natural environment.
Only through a comprehensive and inclusive assessment can the prospects of avoiding the fate of becoming another white elephant be evaluated with more certainty. — DayakDaily
