In the first part of this series, we reviewed the reaction to the legislation that the government recently tabled in Parliament to regulate and tax web shops, despite the public's rejection of that proposition in the January 28, 2013 gaming referendum. Before the referendum, the prime minister proclaimed that he would abide by the referendum results. Subsequently, however, he changed his mind and introduced legislation that would regulate and tax web shop operations.
Accordingly, this week, we will continue to Consider this...Are some of the religious pastors who fought and won the referendum poll correct in their accusation that the prime minister's positional reversal and subsequent actions have signaled the death of democracy in The Bahamas?

The position of the pastors on the gaming poll
Some members of the Christian Council have caustically criticized the government for ignoring the will of the people and, in so doing, foreshadowing the death of democracy in The Bahamas. They suggested that the prime minister has lost his moral authority to govern because he reneged on his promise to abide by the referendum results. Other members have also asserted that they will not participate in any future referenda because they are not confident that the government will abide by the will of the people.
A few pastors have gone as far as maintaining that any parliamentarian who votes in support of the gaming legislation should be voted out of office in the next election.
In arguing their case, none of the pastors seems to appreciate that there are some referenda that are binding on the government, while others are not. For example, the gaming referendum is not one that binds the government to the will of the people, particularly if there are compelling reasons not to do so. The upcoming constitutional referendum, however, is binding and the government cannot act in contravention thereof.
To do so would result in a constitutional crisis which no government would be able to survive. Finally, the president of the Christian Council said that "we have many examples in the Bible of people and nations who go against the will of God." While that is not disputed, he and his colleagues, in all their discussions on this matter, have yet to produce one iota of evidence that the Bible condones or prohibits gambling. I am sure that if they could, they would, but they have not because they cannot.
The prime minister and his deputy responded to the pastors, suggesting that "not one of them has a passport to heaven" and that others have turned a blind eye to web shop gaming for decades.
We will have more to say about the role and relevance of the Christian Council in today's Bahamas next month in this column.

The official opposition
In the meantime, the leader of the official opposition has stated that the prime minister and deputy prime minister have "attacked God's representatives...and when you attack God's earthly representatives, that is a direct attack on God". The leader of the opposition could arguably correctly characterize some pastors as evangelists or perhaps even prophets; but to suggest that they are "God's earthly representatives" can only be described as quintessential hyperbole.
The official opposition's position on the gaming referendum and its reaction thereafter has been disingenuous and duplicitous, at best, and, at worst, laughable. It is disingenuous and duplicitous for the opposition to oppose this legislation because some of the same members who now serve in opposition served as ministers in the Ingraham administration which intended to regularize web shop operations while they were in office, but did not have the courage of their convictions to do so because of their inability to gain the support of the Christian Council.

The fallout from
the legislation
No reasonable person can persuasively argue that the prime minister and his government have not taken a big hit on this one. Perhaps the most serious consequence of the decision to act in contravention of the voice of the people is the erosion of the credibility of the prime minister and his government.
The entire gaming referendum process was fraught with mistakes and missteps by the government. The prime minister himself has admitted to making mistakes, the most egregious of which was seeking the will of the people in the first place. Christie should have followed Ingraham's playbook and proceeded with making the regulations for web shops without the cost of a referendum; but he also should have gone further, as he has now demonstrated, by having the political will to proceed by doing what is best for our country.
The prime minister also erred by declaring that he "did not have a horse in the race", fully cognizant of the urgent revenue needs of the country and the potential for blacklisting if no proactive move was made to regulate this sector.
The prime minister erred again in saying that he would abide by the results of the referendum, knowing full well that this type of referendum was not binding, particularly armed with the knowledge that the jurisdiction faced negative reaction from the international agencies if the government maintained the status quo.

The greater good
We believe that the prime minister and his Cabinet have weighed the considerable political fallout against doing the right thing and have made the right decision in the interest of the greater good. Several important factors would have informed their decision.
First, the web shops are an integral part of the economic Bahamian reality and the displacement of the persons employed in this sector would be harmful, irreconcilable, unjust and unrealistic.
Second, this economic sector provides a vitally useful service, particularly on those islands of The Bahamas where there are no banking institutions.
Third, the passage of the legislation and the resulting regulations will minimize the possibility of the jurisdiction being blacklisted by the international agencies.
Fourth, the enactment of this legislation will empower young Bahamian entrepreneurs to more meaningfully participate in the economy as owners in an area which heretofore has been the primary domain of the foreign Canadian banks. We realize that the commercial banks, especially the foreign commercial banks, have far too long been onerous and oppressive.
They have done little to encourage entrepreneurial development because of their stringent lending policies that are determined and dictated by their headquarters in Canada or Barbados.
Fifth, too much money in the form of banking profits leave the jurisdiction by way of the repatriation of profits of the foreign commercial banks. We believe that, in the fullness of time, web shop owners and regular Bahamians who invest in their companies will establish Bahamian banking institutions, much like the Bank of The Bahamas and Commonwealth Bank. Once the web shops are regularized, their stakeholders will have the opportunity to compete more effectively against the foreign banks, which will result in their profits remaining within the jurisdiction. We should not lose sight of the fact that some of the antecedents of at least one commercial Bahamian bank started in a business activity which, during the years of Prohibition, was considered illicit.
Sixth, the government will be able to increase its revenues from license fees and taxes from the web shops. It is anticipated that at least $25 million annually, which presently escapes the public coffers, will be paid.

Conclusion
In the final analysis, we firmly believe that the prime minister and his government have made the right decision for the economy, despite excessive opposition and criticism from spiritual and temporal quarters whose arguments are neither cogent nor persuasive. In years to come, we submit that historians will look back at this time in our history and will conclude that, consequential upon the debate surrounding the regularization of this sector, the Christie administration has not only laid the foundation for a tectonic transformation of our economy by empowering young, new Bahamian entrepreneurs to participate in the economy as they have never done before, but that the entire process has led to the deepening, not to the death, of our democracy.

o Philip C. Galanis is the managing partner of HLB Galanis and Co., Chartered Accountants, Forensic & Litigation Support Services. He served 15 years in Parliament. Please send your comments to pgalanis@gmail.com.

Click here to read more at The Nassau Guardian