-
IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here. The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.
Aegean Paradise -- Cruise / Casino Ship @ New Century Tours Corporation Pte Ltd
- Thread starter HorLee
- Start date
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2015
- Messages
- 64
- Points
- 0
why NCPG still open wide wide this huge Back Door Aegean Paradise Casino Ship to Gamble ???
MPs call for tighter rules on jackpot operations
While jackpot operations are a cash cow for clubs, Members of Parliament and gambling counsellors warn that these venues provide an easy and accessible outlet for gambling.
They called for additional safeguards to prevent gambling addicts from frequenting such places and for tighter regulations to ensure profits earned from jackpot operations go towards funding a club's core purpose.
Read Also: Football: Tiong Bahru FC amassed $37 million from jackpot revenue
"We must be keenly aware that easy access and proliferation of such jackpot machines can contribute to gambling addiction," said MP Desmond Choo, who sits on the Government Parliamentary Committee (GPC) for Home Affairs and Law.
Football clubs have been using jackpot operations to fund football activities for more than two decades.
The Straits Times has reported that jackpot revenue helps cover around a third of an S.League club's operating costs.
TBFC, a modest side playing in the National Football League, raked in $36.8 million last year from their 29 jackpot machines.
Read Also: Football: Tiong Bahru FC amassed $37 million from jackpot revenue
The sum has raised eyebrows as it was significantly higher than what clubs in the top-tier S.League made - about 10 times more than what local football powerhouses Tampines Rovers earned in the 2013/2014 financial year.
TBFC's clubhouse and two others were raided by the CAD last Thursday.
Its chairman, Mr Bill Ng, his wife, Ms Bonnie Wong, Football Association of Singapore (FAS) general secretary Winston Lee and former Bishan-Toa Payoh GRC MP and FAS president Zainudin Nordin have been arrested and questioned.
Football clubs such as TBFC and other registered societies that want to run jackpot operations have to apply for a private lottery permit from the police.
While the permit conditions state that entry is for members only, checks by ST found membership can be obtained on the spot for as low as $5.
The integrated resorts charge a $100 levy to enter the casino.
MP Zainal Sapari said jackpot activities are important revenue generators for clubs here, and any heavy-handed clampdown would significantly affect their bottom lines.
Even so, more safeguards are needed to prevent addicts from gambling in jackpot rooms, he said. Mr Choo said one starting point could be to broaden casino exclusion orders to include all jackpot rooms and introduce visit limits.
Currently, punters or their family members can apply with the National Council on Problem Gambling to be excluded from only 24 clubs.
ST reported in 2014 that there were 93 such jackpot venues here, with about 2,000 fruit machines. Companies that supply jackpot machines said this number has remained stable.
Data shows that betting taxes collected by the Inland Revenue Authority of Singapore have grown over the years, reaching $2.7 billion in the 2015/2016 financial year. That figure includes casino tax, betting duty and private lotteries duty - the tax levied on jackpot clubs.
Mr Billy Lee, executive director of Blessed Grace Social Services, estimated that 10 per cent of the gambling addicts he sees have patronised jackpot clubs, including those run by football clubs. He called them a "back door" for addicts banned from the casinos.
Like other observers, he reckons that greater oversight is needed to ensure profits from jackpot operations go towards funding a club's core purpose.
For instance, Sinchi FC still maintain a clubhouse with six machines at Sultan Plaza despite having last played in the S.League in 2005.
The club had a gross income of $165,625, according to their latest returns filed with the Registry of Societies.
It was last reported in 2012 that the Chinese club's jackpot revenue was being used to pay off debts, but little is known of their footballing activities.
Said Mr Zainal: "If a football club has no more team, then the licence for it to run a jackpot room should be withdrawn."
MP Seah Kian Peng, who chairs the GPC for Social and Family Development, agreed that regulations governing jackpot clubs need to be updated.
"If there is anything good coming out of this, I think it's that it calls for an urgent review of the status quo," he said.
[email protected]
- See more at: http://news.asiaone.com/news/singap...rules-jackpot-operations#sthash.qVMu6EjK.dpuf
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2015
- Messages
- 64
- Points
- 0
Straits Times, 30 April 2017
Jackpot machines thrilled her like nothing else could.
Their sound effects raised her heart rate and made it feel more exciting than gambling at tables.
Madam Loh (not her real name) especially loved the ka-ching of falling electronic coins. But landing in a $200,000 debt and having to sell her four-room flat motivated her to join the self-exclusion list and stop gambling four years ago.
She staved off the addiction for eight months, until she was bored at a Downtown East chalet, run by NTUC Club, and walked into a jackpot room. “That night reignited my demons. It’s hard to control the urge to gamble,” said the 58-year-old office administrator in Mandarin.
She then started hitting Safra jackpot rooms two to three times a week. And her losses there were no less than at the casino.
IN A GAMBLING BUBBLE
When you’re in the room, you feel no horror, fear or remorse. You just keep betting, hoping to recover your losses. It’s only when you walk out of the place that it hits you and you end up crying.
MADAM LOH
She even took bank loans and borrowed from her family and friends to feed her habit.
The fruit machines take in $10, $50 and $100 notes and, with itchy fingers, the credits do not last long.
Some machines price each bet at just two cents, but there is a minimum number of lines that punters have to bet on.
So each tap of the finger on the button can cost anything from 50 cents to $30 or $40.
Madam Loh said her bets depended on her mood. Sometimes she would get greedy and make big bets, hoping to get bigger winnings. “Once, I went in the morning, left for lunch, then headed back to the jackpot room again. I lost $6,000 in the morning and another $4,000 at night,” she said.
She sometimes visited two outlets in a day, for a change of luck.
As of 2015, there were 84 private lottery clubs that are licensed to have jackpot machines here.
The National Council on Problem Gambling has a self-exclusion scheme for individuals to shut themselves out of online betting outlets and 24 of these jackpot rooms. However, it is not a blanket exclusion across all 24 outlets.
This list also does not cross-reference the self-exclusion one for the casinos, thus gamblers such as Madam Loh can fall through the cracks, quitting the casinos only to fuel their addiction at clubs.
In Madam Loh’s case, hope was a dangerous thing. She said: “When you’re in the room, you feel no horror, fear or remorse. You just keep betting, hoping to recover your losses. It’s only when you walk out of the place that it hits you and you end up crying.”
She was mired in jackpot rooms until last year when friends intervened and took her to Blessed Grace Social Services for help.
The former jackpot machine addict now has this to say: “At least the casinos have a $100 levy, but the jackpot rooms are so easy to get into.”
These private clubs are “evil”.
“The temptation is so big. I see housewives going to play until 4pm or 5pm before they return home to cook. Some say they’ve lost their grocery money.
“There shouldn’t be so many of these places. The Government should slowly close them down. Out of 10 bets, you’ll lose nine times. The machines’ odds are set, it is very stupid to go and ‘donate’ your money to them,” she said.
Jackpot machines thrilled her like nothing else could.
Their sound effects raised her heart rate and made it feel more exciting than gambling at tables.
Madam Loh (not her real name) especially loved the ka-ching of falling electronic coins. But landing in a $200,000 debt and having to sell her four-room flat motivated her to join the self-exclusion list and stop gambling four years ago.
She staved off the addiction for eight months, until she was bored at a Downtown East chalet, run by NTUC Club, and walked into a jackpot room. “That night reignited my demons. It’s hard to control the urge to gamble,” said the 58-year-old office administrator in Mandarin.
She then started hitting Safra jackpot rooms two to three times a week. And her losses there were no less than at the casino.
IN A GAMBLING BUBBLE
When you’re in the room, you feel no horror, fear or remorse. You just keep betting, hoping to recover your losses. It’s only when you walk out of the place that it hits you and you end up crying.
MADAM LOH
She even took bank loans and borrowed from her family and friends to feed her habit.
The fruit machines take in $10, $50 and $100 notes and, with itchy fingers, the credits do not last long.
Some machines price each bet at just two cents, but there is a minimum number of lines that punters have to bet on.
So each tap of the finger on the button can cost anything from 50 cents to $30 or $40.
Madam Loh said her bets depended on her mood. Sometimes she would get greedy and make big bets, hoping to get bigger winnings. “Once, I went in the morning, left for lunch, then headed back to the jackpot room again. I lost $6,000 in the morning and another $4,000 at night,” she said.
She sometimes visited two outlets in a day, for a change of luck.
As of 2015, there were 84 private lottery clubs that are licensed to have jackpot machines here.
The National Council on Problem Gambling has a self-exclusion scheme for individuals to shut themselves out of online betting outlets and 24 of these jackpot rooms. However, it is not a blanket exclusion across all 24 outlets.
This list also does not cross-reference the self-exclusion one for the casinos, thus gamblers such as Madam Loh can fall through the cracks, quitting the casinos only to fuel their addiction at clubs.
In Madam Loh’s case, hope was a dangerous thing. She said: “When you’re in the room, you feel no horror, fear or remorse. You just keep betting, hoping to recover your losses. It’s only when you walk out of the place that it hits you and you end up crying.”
She was mired in jackpot rooms until last year when friends intervened and took her to Blessed Grace Social Services for help.
The former jackpot machine addict now has this to say: “At least the casinos have a $100 levy, but the jackpot rooms are so easy to get into.”
These private clubs are “evil”.
“The temptation is so big. I see housewives going to play until 4pm or 5pm before they return home to cook. Some say they’ve lost their grocery money.
“There shouldn’t be so many of these places. The Government should slowly close them down. Out of 10 bets, you’ll lose nine times. The machines’ odds are set, it is very stupid to go and ‘donate’ your money to them,” she said.
- Joined
- Apr 10, 2015
- Messages
- 28
- Points
- 3
Hearsay Mdm Loh started her 1st jackpot pull at he Marina Bay casino.
Later she became member at Sentosa casino and visiting quite often.
She was barred by National Gaming Council and her next option is to the casino cruise ship.
She owed many ah longs at ship and switch to local club.
Personally I feel National gaming council should not barred gamers instead to educate and control with more physical check inside our casinos.
Sad our 2 casinos really make people suffered with no proper system.
Later she became member at Sentosa casino and visiting quite often.
She was barred by National Gaming Council and her next option is to the casino cruise ship.
She owed many ah longs at ship and switch to local club.
Personally I feel National gaming council should not barred gamers instead to educate and control with more physical check inside our casinos.
Sad our 2 casinos really make people suffered with no proper system.
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2015
- Messages
- 432
- Points
- 28
The reporter should be honest enough to interview the jackpot punters in the 2 casinos!
A friend of mine just one night loss $30,000 in the jackpot machine and rewarded with one night free hotel stay.
Can please Casino Regulatory Authority , cra , posted ? Thank you. Cra will take enforcement action.
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2015
- Messages
- 432
- Points
- 28
First, do our 2 Integrated Resorts casinos really create job for local ????
Yes, it had given 40% job to foreign workers inside the 2 casinos and congested our MRT transport. It increases crimes days after days.
I remember during recent Chinese New Year one mother and a daughter was killed by the father due to gambling in our legal casino. What happened to CRA, still sleeping ???
Has our CRA do research on gamblers.
I know a couple loss over $2M within 3 years playing with our licence casino jackpot machine.
Why CRA does not barred them???
Something is wrong with ncpg. only know how to harress old uncles and aunties. govt issued Casino Acts for fark ?
local sinkies who lost big should be on their raddar also .
closed all doors for uncles and aunties but open back door for them to go a,p and a phui!!!
local sinkies who lost big should be on their raddar also .
closed all doors for uncles and aunties but open back door for them to go a,p and a phui!!!
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2015
- Messages
- 64
- Points
- 0
Ah Pek and aunties play so small bet wasting time some more they tak pao so NCPG must banned them by throwing enior citizens outside Singapore. NCPG can't be bothered the banned punters go casino ship to jump sea or Genting to jump hill, 'you die your biz'. NCPG BO CHUP as not belonging to their parameter. NCPG , no eyes see how you die outside Singapore. NCPG only want the rich punters cos the more they loss the more revenue they collected and their job is safe. With no rich punters to loss big money, you think NCPC staff still got job !
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2015
- Messages
- 64
- Points
- 0
Attachments
- Joined
- Apr 10, 2015
- Messages
- 28
- Points
- 3
Since NCPG like to ban uncles & aunties to visit the 2 licence casino, how about the govt also banned with their passports to stop them for travel.
I hear the cruise ship is very much dangerous than our casinos.
The best is the shut down the 2 casinos to stop more tragedy.
I don't think our 2 Integrated Resort casino really create jobs for local.
please tear down the 2 suck blood casinos and save lives.
the 2 casinos and cruise ship have brought in disaster, countless family members sufferings.
Ncpg, in the eyes of God, you should also banned uncles and aunties with their passports to stop them to travel to hell.
Sister Bitchy you bring up a very good point. NCPG doing fire fighting work only. Not enough Education help for retired aunties and uncles. Putting blames on punters . NCPG dont even know Why punters gamble in the first place. A bunch of Fire Fighters putting out the Fire at wrong place.:(
bro Extinguisher are you part of the 4000 punters that were Sabotage by the 2 casinos RWS and MBS.
this 2 casinos after enticing you with freebees and free points for foods and sucking you dry they Then
submit your names to NCPG hahaha !!!
Asia One : 13 June 2016
New curbs to limit monthly gambling visits
SINGAPORE - At least 4,000 financially vulnerable gamblers will face a monthly limit on the number of times they can enter the two casinos here from Saturday.
However, the National Council on Problem Gambling (NCPG) said yesterday there will be no fixed cap across the board because the circumstances surrounding each gambler are different.
"We don't want people to have this impression that X number of times is OK and that there is a safe limit," said Acting Minister for Social and Family Development Chan Chun Sing.
Instead, the number of times a gambler will be allowed in the Marina Bay Sands or Resorts World Sentosa casinos each month will be determined by factors such as the frequency and pattern of their visits, their credit record, their work situation and information provided by family members.
Mr Chan said the NCPG is taking a "very targeted approach" which will see it tackle the problem "upstream" instead of turning to an outright ban.
But he also cautioned that the visit limit is just an "additional tool in the arsenal" of gambling safeguards as there is no one solution to the complex problem.
Income level is not a criterion because a high-income earner may face as much financial distress as a low-income earner if his gambling habit is out of control, said the NCPG.
Instead, the council has its eyes trained on high-frequency gamblers, who visit the casinos more than six times a month.
The estimated 4,000 to 6,000 financially vulnerable gamblers here account for about 2 per cent to 3 per cent of total visitors. The two casinos drew in some 270,000 gamblers in 2011.
Data on problem gamblers will be provided by the casinos to the council, which will then send those individuals letters requesting them to furnish information on their financial situation.
A Committee of Assessors (COA) - made up of about 70 members from the council and grassroots and social service organisations - will then decide the extent of the visit limit to impose on the gambler and, depending on the situation, may even slap an exclusion order on him.
The individual may object to the visit limit, should he deem it too harsh or have settled his debts by then.
There will be two other types of visit limits - a voluntary one in which the gambler applies his own restrictions, and a family one applied for by immediate family members. In the latter case, the COA will decide whether to issue the visit limit.
Casino visit restrictions already exist in some countries.
The Holland Casino in Amsterdam monitors the frequency of visits of each patron. Casinos Austria and the Crown Casino in Melbourne allow patrons to set limits on the time and amount they spend on gambling every day.
Mr Chan noted that these countries have "varying degrees of success" and that his ministry is studying other measures such as limiting bet amounts.
How the safeguards work
THERE will be three types of casino visit limits under the new social safeguards, following changes to the Casino Control Act in November last year.
These limits, applying only to Singaporeans and permanent residents, will cap the number of times an individual can visit the casinos in a month.
1. VOLUNTARY VISIT LIMIT
Individuals may voluntarily apply to the National Council on Problem Gambling (NCPG), either online or in person at the council's office, to limit their own visits to up to eight times per month.
2. FAMILY VISIT LIMIT
Immediate family members may call the NCPG helpline to limit a relative's visits. They must prove that the person has neglected the family due to their gambling habits.
A Committee of Assessors, appointed by the NCPG, will decide whether to issue the visit limit, or refer the gambler to go for counselling, rehabilitation and special education sessions.
The whole process of obtaining a visit limit is likely to take up to two weeks, although an interim visit limit can be brought about within a few days if there is an urgent need.
The voluntary visit limit and family visit limit can be revoked after a year if there is any change in the gambler's circumstances.
3. THIRD-PARTY VISIT LIMIT
The committee may send letters to those found to have poor credit reports and are at risk financially to get statements to prove their financial situation.
It can then decide whether to impose the limit on the individual, who may object to it. The limit will depend on each gambler's circumstances.
Those slapped with the visit limit may also be required to go for counselling, rehabilitation and education sessions.
The third-party visit limit may be revoked at any time if there is any change in the gambler's circumstances.
[email protected]
[email protected]
Knn this RWS and MBS and the biggest Devils Phui !!!
How can they SABOTAGED punters who suppoorted them with their life savings ??? Phui !!!
SINGAPORE - At least 4,000 financially vulnerable gamblers will face a monthly limit on the number of times they can enter the two casinos here from Saturday.
However, the National Council on Problem Gambling (NCPG) said yesterday there will be no fixed cap across the board because the circumstances surrounding each gambler are different.
"We don't want people to have this impression that X number of times is OK and that there is a safe limit," said Acting Minister for Social and Family Development Chan Chun Sing.
Instead, the number of times a gambler will be allowed in the Marina Bay Sands or Resorts World Sentosa casinos each month will be determined by factors such as the frequency and pattern of their visits, their credit record, their work situation and information provided by family members.
Mr Chan said the NCPG is taking a "very targeted approach" which will see it tackle the problem "upstream" instead of turning to an outright ban.
But he also cautioned that the visit limit is just an "additional tool in the arsenal" of gambling safeguards as there is no one solution to the complex problem.
Income level is not a criterion because a high-income earner may face as much financial distress as a low-income earner if his gambling habit is out of control, said the NCPG.
Instead, the council has its eyes trained on high-frequency gamblers, who visit the casinos more than six times a month.
The estimated 4,000 to 6,000 financially vulnerable gamblers here account for about 2 per cent to 3 per cent of total visitors. The two casinos drew in some 270,000 gamblers in 2011.
Data on problem gamblers will be provided by the casinos to the council, which will then send those individuals letters requesting them to furnish information on their financial situation.
A Committee of Assessors (COA) - made up of about 70 members from the council and grassroots and social service organisations - will then decide the extent of the visit limit to impose on the gambler and, depending on the situation, may even slap an exclusion order on him.
The individual may object to the visit limit, should he deem it too harsh or have settled his debts by then.
There will be two other types of visit limits - a voluntary one in which the gambler applies his own restrictions, and a family one applied for by immediate family members. In the latter case, the COA will decide whether to issue the visit limit.
Casino visit restrictions already exist in some countries.
The Holland Casino in Amsterdam monitors the frequency of visits of each patron. Casinos Austria and the Crown Casino in Melbourne allow patrons to set limits on the time and amount they spend on gambling every day.
Mr Chan noted that these countries have "varying degrees of success" and that his ministry is studying other measures such as limiting bet amounts.
How can they SABOTAGED punters who suppoorted them with their life savings ??? Phui !!!
SINGAPORE - At least 4,000 financially vulnerable gamblers will face a monthly limit on the number of times they can enter the two casinos here from Saturday.
However, the National Council on Problem Gambling (NCPG) said yesterday there will be no fixed cap across the board because the circumstances surrounding each gambler are different.
"We don't want people to have this impression that X number of times is OK and that there is a safe limit," said Acting Minister for Social and Family Development Chan Chun Sing.
Instead, the number of times a gambler will be allowed in the Marina Bay Sands or Resorts World Sentosa casinos each month will be determined by factors such as the frequency and pattern of their visits, their credit record, their work situation and information provided by family members.
Mr Chan said the NCPG is taking a "very targeted approach" which will see it tackle the problem "upstream" instead of turning to an outright ban.
But he also cautioned that the visit limit is just an "additional tool in the arsenal" of gambling safeguards as there is no one solution to the complex problem.
Income level is not a criterion because a high-income earner may face as much financial distress as a low-income earner if his gambling habit is out of control, said the NCPG.
Instead, the council has its eyes trained on high-frequency gamblers, who visit the casinos more than six times a month.
The estimated 4,000 to 6,000 financially vulnerable gamblers here account for about 2 per cent to 3 per cent of total visitors. The two casinos drew in some 270,000 gamblers in 2011.
Data on problem gamblers will be provided by the casinos to the council, which will then send those individuals letters requesting them to furnish information on their financial situation.
A Committee of Assessors (COA) - made up of about 70 members from the council and grassroots and social service organisations - will then decide the extent of the visit limit to impose on the gambler and, depending on the situation, may even slap an exclusion order on him.
The individual may object to the visit limit, should he deem it too harsh or have settled his debts by then.
There will be two other types of visit limits - a voluntary one in which the gambler applies his own restrictions, and a family one applied for by immediate family members. In the latter case, the COA will decide whether to issue the visit limit.
Casino visit restrictions already exist in some countries.
The Holland Casino in Amsterdam monitors the frequency of visits of each patron. Casinos Austria and the Crown Casino in Melbourne allow patrons to set limits on the time and amount they spend on gambling every day.
Mr Chan noted that these countries have "varying degrees of success" and that his ministry is studying other measures such as limiting bet amounts.
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2015
- Messages
- 64
- Points
- 0
Sister Bitchy you bring up a very good point. NCPG doing fire fighting work only. Not enough Education help for retired aunties and uncles. Putting blames on punters . NCPG dont even know Why punters gamble in the first place. A bunch of Fire Fighters putting out the Fire at wrong place.:(
bro Extinguisher are you part of the 4000 punters that were Sabotage by the 2 casinos RWS and MBS.
this 2 casinos after enticing you with freebees and free points for foods and sucking you dry they Then
submit your names to NCPG hahaha !!!
Asia One : 13 June 2016
New curbs to limit monthly gambling visits
SINGAPORE - At least 4,000 financially vulnerable gamblers will face a monthly limit on the number of times they can enter the two casinos here from Saturday.
However, the National Council on Problem Gambling (NCPG) said yesterday there will be no fixed cap across the board because the circumstances surrounding each gambler are different.
"We don't want people to have this impression that X number of times is OK and that there is a safe limit," said Acting Minister for Social and Family Development Chan Chun Sing.
Instead, the number of times a gambler will be allowed in the Marina Bay Sands or Resorts World Sentosa casinos each month will be determined by factors such as the frequency and pattern of their visits, their credit record, their work situation and information provided by family members.
Mr Chan said the NCPG is taking a "very targeted approach" which will see it tackle the problem "upstream" instead of turning to an outright ban.
But he also cautioned that the visit limit is just an "additional tool in the arsenal" of gambling safeguards as there is no one solution to the complex problem.
Income level is not a criterion because a high-income earner may face as much financial distress as a low-income earner if his gambling habit is out of control, said the NCPG.
Instead, the council has its eyes trained on high-frequency gamblers, who visit the casinos more than six times a month.
The estimated 4,000 to 6,000 financially vulnerable gamblers here account for about 2 per cent to 3 per cent of total visitors. The two casinos drew in some 270,000 gamblers in 2011.
Data on problem gamblers will be provided by the casinos to the council, which will then send those individuals letters requesting them to furnish information on their financial situation.
A Committee of Assessors (COA) - made up of about 70 members from the council and grassroots and social service organisations - will then decide the extent of the visit limit to impose on the gambler and, depending on the situation, may even slap an exclusion order on him.
The individual may object to the visit limit, should he deem it too harsh or have settled his debts by then.
There will be two other types of visit limits - a voluntary one in which the gambler applies his own restrictions, and a family one applied for by immediate family members. In the latter case, the COA will decide whether to issue the visit limit.
Casino visit restrictions already exist in some countries.
The Holland Casino in Amsterdam monitors the frequency of visits of each patron. Casinos Austria and the Crown Casino in Melbourne allow patrons to set limits on the time and amount they spend on gambling every day.
Mr Chan noted that these countries have "varying degrees of success" and that his ministry is studying other measures such as limiting bet amounts.
How the safeguards work
THERE will be three types of casino visit limits under the new social safeguards, following changes to the Casino Control Act in November last year.
These limits, applying only to Singaporeans and permanent residents, will cap the number of times an individual can visit the casinos in a month.
1. VOLUNTARY VISIT LIMIT
Individuals may voluntarily apply to the National Council on Problem Gambling (NCPG), either online or in person at the council's office, to limit their own visits to up to eight times per month.
2. FAMILY VISIT LIMIT
Immediate family members may call the NCPG helpline to limit a relative's visits. They must prove that the person has neglected the family due to their gambling habits.
A Committee of Assessors, appointed by the NCPG, will decide whether to issue the visit limit, or refer the gambler to go for counselling, rehabilitation and special education sessions.
The whole process of obtaining a visit limit is likely to take up to two weeks, although an interim visit limit can be brought about within a few days if there is an urgent need.
The voluntary visit limit and family visit limit can be revoked after a year if there is any change in the gambler's circumstances.
3. THIRD-PARTY VISIT LIMIT
The committee may send letters to those found to have poor credit reports and are at risk financially to get statements to prove their financial situation.
It can then decide whether to impose the limit on the individual, who may object to it. The limit will depend on each gambler's circumstances.
Those slapped with the visit limit may also be required to go for counselling, rehabilitation and education sessions.
The third-party visit limit may be revoked at any time if there is any change in the gambler's circumstances.
[email protected]
[email protected]
1. who agreed that the 2 licence casinos do not really jobs for local?
Kee Chiew !
2. who believe the 2 licence casinos bring disaster to family members?
Kee Chiew !
3. Who support to shut down the 2 casinos and cruise ship ?
Kee Chiew !
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2015
- Messages
- 64
- Points
- 0
Similar threads
