Local News

For foreigners only?

Caribupdate Weekly

Editorials

April 3, 2013: WE welcome the various announcements outlined in the March 27 Throne Speech by the Governor General, in what this newspaper last week called a “bold agenda’’.

What the New National Party’s healthy majority in parliament affords it, is the political room and capital to do bold things that previous administrations were too weak or too timid to touch.

One of the things that stood out in last week’s announcements was the decision to explore the possibility of the introduction of casino gambling.

We have heard the “moral’’ arguments against casino gambling from a small group of religious conservatives.

And, while we must be mindful of their sensitivities in that regard, they’d appreciate that the strength of their arguments against gambling is undermined in a community that has long embraced a national lottery scheme – or, openly, supports 100,000-dollar unregulated national bingos.

Our reservation about the proposed introduction of casino gambling in limited areas is the apparent policy position that it will be restricted to “foreigners only’’.

Philosophically, we are opposed to the idea that a foreigner can do something in the land of our birth that we cannot – no matter what the activity.

Once an activity is legal, it must be for all.

By suggesting that our people are not good enough, nor disciplined enough, to responsibly participate in that form of gaming is, frankly, an affront to national pride; that decision will subject the citizenry to a kind of “gaming apartheid’’ – if you will.

So, how will this work in practice? And, will the energy spent on having to police it, not better be spent elsewhere?

What happens when a “foreign friend’’ visits and wants to enjoy the casino? What will the national do? Drop him or her off, and come back later?

We understand the government’s caution – especially with a small, but supposedly influential, conservative block whose stomachs turn at the idea.

But there is nothing called timid boldness. If you’re bold, you’re bold.

And, this administration has the political capital to be bolder than it is showing on this issue of casino gambling.

Back door parliament entry obscene

ANOTHER thing that stood out at last week’s official start of the new parliamentary term is how much people are upset to see “the return’’ of Nazim Burke, with the kind compliments of Grenada’s activist Governor General Sir Carlyle Glean.

Sources close to Burke said that he felt it was important for him to both lobby and accept the appointment to the senate because it will be crucial to his “national rehabilitation’’, following the pounding he received during the national election campaign.

The problem with Burke’s image has not been battering and the chattering over the story of his “three houses’’; that, in fact, is not the story in and of itself. The issue is the man himself, Burke.

He has come to be seen as the most uncaring face – real or imagined – of the failed National Democratic Congress.

If he doubted how Grenadians felt, he would have surely heard the repeated groans of disapproval every time he stood for one of those mundane things at the parliament’s opening.

He should then contrast that to the very warm applause given to the man who defeated him – Tobias Clement.

In that regard, we endorse the comments made to the media last week by Chester Humphrey, himself a former senator.

Humphrey said: “If I had contested a general election and lost, I would not have come into parliament through the back door. I thought it obscene.’’

Judging from national reaction last week, there are many people who also feel so.

Comments are closed.