Former prime minister Abhisit Vejjajiva has expressed his opposition to the bill proposing the establishment of integrated entertainment complexes that include casinos, citing concerns about the social and economic impact.
Mr Abhisit spoke with the Bangkok Post before the draft bill was due to be read in parliament. That was originally scheduled for today but later postponed.
He warned about the risk of a spike in gambling addiction as part of larger societal problems of debt and crime. His view was that endorsing gambling, both in brick-and-mortar casinos and online, was sending the wrong signal to the public.
Gambling often leads to a lack of financial discipline and mounting debt, he said, on top of the broader economic problem.
Mr Abhisit said a government that has already adopted a policy of handing out cash unconditionally also risked encouraging more people to get involved in gambling.
The government claims the bill will boost tourism and draw more visitors to man-made attractions. But Mr Abhisit said when the government issued its policy statement to parliament, it did not openly mention casinos.
Instead, it adopted the term "integrated entertainment complex" as a strategic move to mask the true intention of establishing legal casinos as officials knew most of the public would oppose it, he said.
"Actually, any such complex could exclude a casino, but this proposed law stipulates that it must include one," Mr Abhisit said.
He argued that the absence of casinos has not deterred foreign tourists from visiting the country so far.
"I don't think there are many international visitors who decided not come to Thailand because there are no casinos here," he said.
He said casinos would unlikely prove a huge tourist magnet and questioned how much money they would inject into the economy on other spending.
While casinos generate jobs and tax revenue, they also bring risks, particularly transnational crime and money laundering -- issues Thailand has already struggled to manage, Mr Abhisit said.
"Recently, we cracked down on gambling websites and call centre gangs along the border (with Myanmar and Cambodia). All of them have some kind of connection with casinos," he said.
"I cannot see what we could gain from (the new draft bill). I can only see the downside," he said.
He also criticised the policy for sidestepping other important tonics to social problems, such as focusing on gambling prevention or rehabilitation measures.
On top of all that, he expressed concern over the lack of transparency regarding the casino bill.
Too much power would be placed in the hands of a government-appointed committee over areas of licensing, tax collection and zoning, he said, which could lead to corruption and only benefit a small group of people.
Despite government claims that legalising casinos would help to curb illegal gambling, Mr Abhisit said he believes it would only make things worse.
"There are indications that online gambling may pose a great threat to society," he said.
He cited the case of Singapore -- often cited as a model of successful casino management -- saying even developed nations have suffered from the negative social consequences of gambling.
He warned that China, which strongly opposes gambling among its citizens, could warn its people against visiting Thailand, which would have huge economic repercussions.
He also questioned the government's sense of urgency in pushing ahead with the bill, saying that vested interests might be the motive.
"I don't really get why this policy seems so rushed compared to other issues."
When asked whether the likely bill would pass and be implemented, he said the public backlash and scrutiny from political parties and the Senate could delay it.
"Even the revised draft returned by the Council of State includes new conditions requiring public hearings and impact assessments. These provisions may slow the bill's progress during the tenure of this administration," he said.
Regarding the position of coalition parties, the former premier said while they have not opposed the bill, they have not actively supported it.
He speculated that they may adopt a wait-and-see approach, pending the reaction of the public or what is going to be said at the parliamentary debate during the first reading.
After that, if or when the draft bill is passed, more revisions can be expected, he said.
Mr Abhisit said that even if the draft bill is finally passed into law, a limit of the licence duration, currently set for 30 years, might help soften any negative impact it may potentially have on society.
