Minister Davies denies gambling claims by Opposition

MINISTER OF Finance and Planning, Dr. Omar Davies, has denied claims by the Opposition that the latest amendments to the Betting, Gaming and Lotteries Act was introducing casino gambling "through the back door."

Dr. Davies was supported by his Minister of State, Errol Ennis, as they reacted to questions raised by Opposition spokesman on Finance, Audley Shaw in the House of Representatives, Tuesday.

They were participating in the debate on the Bill amending the Betting, Gaming and Lotteries Act, requiring all gaming machines (including coin-operated machines) to be licensed annually at a cost of $2, 000 and levied at a cost of $10,000 annually and empowering the Betting, Gaming and Lotteries Commission to determine the number of machines operable at any location, subject to a maximum of 70.

Mr. Shaw said: "I ask the question, is this not a method now of introducing casino gambling into Jamaica without any fanfare whatsoever?" He said that the amendment was a major one and affected the only area of the Bill that needed changing to facilitate the introduction of casinos.

He said that all the available evidence pointed to this eventuality and that, as a matter of fact, one major hotel in Montego Bay was already in discussions with an American company on the matter.

"So the issue that remains is not whether we are getting casinos, is when we are getting casinos and the basis on which we are getting casinos. There are only two bases on which you get casinos in Jamaica: One, is through the front door; the other one is through the back door," Mr. Shaw suggested.

He said that if it is done through the "front door," benefits to the country and the economy would be maximised and it would be supported with proper regulations and protection against infiltration from the underworld. However, going through the "back door" would mean no new incremental investments, no highly visible addition to the tourism plant and, over time, earnings would become negligible and questionable.

He said that, on this basis, the Minister should tell the country whether this was the casino Bill and, if so, why they have not opted for the more formal method of introducing casinos?

But, Dr. Davies responded that the Bill was not about casinos. He said that it was only seeking to provide the Betting Gaming and Lotteries Commission with the legal framework in which to exercise control over all aspects of the gaming machines operations.

He was supported by his Minister of State, Errol Ennis, who said that the suggestion that the Bill was tied to casinos was created by speculation in the Press.

"I think we should disregard most of what we've heard. the Government's policy is very clear on the issue," Mr. Ennis said.

Back to Lead Stories