The casino question would be a part of the constitutional referendum promised by the government next year if the Constitutional Commission recommends that it be addressed as part of broader constitutional reforms, Prime Minister Perry Christie has revealed exclusively to National Review. This would be a separate referendum from the gambling referendum planned for January 28. There has been a loud outcry over the ongoing discrimination against Bahamians and permanent residents related to the prohibition on casino gambling. Visitors to The Bahamas, on the other hand, are able to freely patronize local casinos. The prime minister indicated to National Review that he would support Bahamians having their say on whether they wish to see this discriminatory practice ended.
"The Government of The Bahamas when it appointed the Constitutional Commission knew that the Constitutional Commission had within its remit the question of looking at the Constitution, listening to people and taking all of the issues that will be put before the people in a constitutional referendum," Christie said. "And so, we did not want to mix up the two, and so in the general election campaign we put into our platform, which we called the Charter for Governance, that we will deal with this issue of web shop gambling and lotteries and that's where we are. "And so, I expect the other issue (the casino issue) to come about under (Sean) McWeeney's commission. McWeeney and Carl Bethel (the opposition's representative) and others are on that. "And then we will take a look at that (the casino issue) as to whether that will be a question on the referendum that will follow.
They have until the end of March to report, so it's not long." The prime minister explained to National Review he did not want to mix up issues that should be addressed in a constitutional referendum with others -- like web shops and a national lottery -- that will be addressed in the January 28 consultative referendum. Christie has appointed a Constitutional Commission headed by former Attorney General Sean McWeeney to review the Constitution and make recommendations for reform. His revelation on the casino question follows changes he made relating to the January 28 consultative referendum. When Christie pulled back last week from his previous referendum position, he began the process of untangling himself from the knots he had created by his communication to Parliament two weeks earlier, and a series of confusing statements that followed on the issue.
By placing the national lottery question back on the ballot, pushing the vote from December 3 to January 28, and bringing a bill to provide the legal framework for a non-constitutional referendum, Christie acknowledged the need to bring clarity to what had become a very confusing and seemingly rushed effort. But this did not appease many people who continue to push for the government to address the gambling issue in its totality, including the elimination of discrimination against Bahamians and permanent residents when it comes to casino gambling. Christie has remained strong in his position that the casino question will not be on the January 28 ballot. The government has promised the constitutional referendum to be held before the 40th anniversary of independence on July 10 next year. McWeeney and his commission are mandated to conduct a comprehensive review of the Constitution, which has remained unchanged since independence. The discrimination against Bahamians relative to the casino issue is allowed to exist as a result of certain constitutional provisions.
Article 26 (1) of the Constitution states that "no law shall make any provision which is discriminatory either of itself or in its effect." However, Article 26 (4) (e) states that this article shall not apply to any law so far as that law makes provision "for authorizing the granting of licenses or certificates permitting the conduct of a lottery, the keeping of a gaming house or the carrying on of gambling in any of its forms subject to conditions which impose upon persons who are citizens of The Bahamas disabilities or restriction to which other persons are not made subject". It is the Lotteries and Gaming Act 1969 that prohibits citizens and permanent residents of The Bahamas from patronizing casinos in The Bahamas. As noted, this discrimination has been the subject of heated debate, particularly in recent weeks as the government turned its attention toward the gambling referendum.
The call for the elimination of the discriminatory provision of the Constitution has been widespread. In his latest column on constitutional reform, former Attorney General Alfred Sears urged the commission to address this matter. "I urge that the Constitutional Review Commission recommend the removal of derogation clause 4 (e) from Article 26 of the Constitution, in order to affirm the constitutional norm of non-discrimination, regularize and tax the Bahamian community gaming industry and open casino gaming to Bahamian ownership, management and patronage," wrote Sears in the article titled "The Constitution, gaming and discrimination", which was published in the November 15th edition of The Nassau Guardian. Sears questioned whether this blanket prohibition of Bahamians from gaming can be justified, on the grounds of public policy and constitutional principle, given the current support of and subsidy by the government of foreign-operated casino gaming in The Bahamas. View The view that has been expressed by many other Bahamians in this whole gambling debate is that it makes no sense to vote in the web shop and lottery referendum if the casino question is not addressed.
Back in July, former Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham suggested it would be a waste of time to vote in a gambling referendum that does not address the casino question. In fact, Ingraham said he would not vote in such a referendum. He told reporters at a press conference at the House of Assembly on July 19 that had he been re-elected, his administration would have addressed the gambling issue in all its forms. "If you're going to put the question of gambling to the public of The Bahamas, then the whole question must be put," Ingraham said. "We are singular in our decision in The Bahamas that excludes its citizens from being able to gamble in our casinos. Nobody else in the world does that." He added that the law that banned Bahamians from casino gaming was made in the 1960s, at a time when it was also illegal for locals to work at casino tables. He said the government later saw fit to reverse that decision.
"In fact at the time of independence in 1973 the then prime minister (Sir Lynden Pindling) said at a press conference that as long as he was prime minister there would never be a Bahamian croupier in the casinos in The Bahamas, because that was the established policy," Ingraham said. "They changed their mind over time. The public of The Bahamas ought to have a right to decide whether they want to gamble in the casinos or not." And there are many others who share that position. George Smith, who is a former chairman of the Hotel Corporation, noted that after the January 28 referendum, it will still be illegal for citizens, residents and work permit holders to gamble in local casinos. "We can't talk about getting rid of discriminatory clauses and all its aspects without looking at the lotteries and gaming legislation which does not permit Bahamians and residents to gamble at our casinos," Smith said.
"When we talk about getting out all the gender and discriminatory provisions in the Constitution, a debate on whether we will continue to permit an activity taking place in the country that prevents nationals, work permit holders and residents from gambling at the casinos in the country must take place." Debate While the January referendum will focus on the web shop and national lottery issues, it would be surprising if MPs do not debate the casino issue when the House of Assembly debates a bill to provide for the legal framework for the approaching non-constitutional referendum. The prime minister has said repeatedly that the government has no horse in the race as it relates to that referendum.
He said he does not expect Progressive Liberal Party MPs to encourage a 'yes' or 'no' vote, and the government will act based on the outcome of the referendum. "What is very alarming to me is that the members of the FNM or some members of the FNM have determined to make this a political issue," Christie told National Review. "We are trying not to wear colors in this debate, not to get directly involved in the battle, even though... [I have begun] to indicate that the government has to take a greater stand, a strong stand in terms of moving the country to at least consider the implications of 'no' and what it means given the extent to which these people are interwoven into the fabric of our country. "I think our membership reflects the same kind of thoughts in the country where some are for and some are against, etc. But the Government of The Bahamas has determined at this point that we are not going to ride a horse in this and therefore members of the government, at this stage, will be obliged to take that position."
Click here to read more at The Nassau Guardian
