The Tribune

By ADRIAN GIBSON

ajbahama@hotmail.com

THE gambling referendum was nothing short of a colossal failure, an opinion poll that can only be likened to a swift drop kick, collectively meted out by an electorate clearly fed-up with the chaotic process leading up to voting day. The national survey was a waste of time, a superfluous squandering of more than a million dollars of taxpayer money and, for many business places, shrunk their profit margins as employees had to—according to law—be given time off to cast their ballots. Monday’s opinion poll—a.k.a. gambling referendum—was perhaps the dumbest, most convoluted national undertaking in modern Bahamian history.

Quite frankly, in the face of the referendum outcome and other recent scandals, the governing party seems to be stumbling from one disaster to another and, for them, next week is setting up to be glaringly embarrassing as it is likely that a Constitutional challenge will be mounted. At this juncture, the referendum results stand to be overturned and the government seems to be playing rock, paper and scissors with our democracy. Ultimately, this matter may go before the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council. Clearly, the farce that became a national circus would not have happened if the Attorney General had done her homework. The Bahamian people have been put in a very difficult situation, having been asked to participate in a process that may have offended our fundamental constitutional rights and that was profoundly flawed.

On Monday, Bahamians soundly rejected both of the referendum questions, leaving Prime Minister Perry Christie to fulfil his promise to shut down gambling/number operations with immediate effect. Notably, with some delay, the Prime Minister ordered that the operations cease; however, within hours, noted attorney Wayne Munroe and former Attorney General Alfred Sears had obtained an injunction that prevented the government from shutting down these operations pending the outcome of all substantive matters relative to the legality of web shops.

That said, it appears—from the talk shows and newspapers—that the public is crucifying the government right now, particularly in the aftermath of referendum results that saw the rebuffing of both questions and saw historically low voter turnout. The entire process was poorly stage managed and never appeared to be sincerely premised on the resolution of what some refer to as a “societal vice” but rather to seal a deal to a group of benefactors under the guise (secondary gain) of it being a shot in the arm to the national coffers. Frankly, it seems that it was assumed that the referendum would be a slam dunk in favour of the “yes” lobby and it was this arrogance that led the government to rush all elements of the process.

Dr Duane Sands, noted heart surgeon and deputy chairman of the Free National Movement said:

“The ambiguity of the questions; the fact that casino gambling was deliberately excluded; the fact that it appeared to be only about a matter unique to Bahamians and not visitors; and the fact that they were not mindful of the Constitutional and legal ramifications that such a referendum would have had, created a huge nightmare not only for the government as a whole but particularly for the Prime Minister and the Attorney General. Unfortunately, in the end the Bahamian people will suffer the most!”

Beyond the haste with which the exercise was undertaken, it appears that certain people intricately involved in the process presumed that they could ride roughshod over extremely vocal opponents, particularly persons who would normally be seen as part of the governing party’s support base –many of whom are traditional supporters such as Bishop Neil Ellis, Franklyn Wilson, etc. What’s more, within the governing party’s own political caucus there were dissenting voices who flat-out stated their opposition to the referendum and/or their objection to the gambling questions—from Picewell Forbes, Melanie Griffin, Alfred Gray, Dr Kendal Major, Cynthia “Mother” Pratt and so on. Even more, the over-the-top campaign tactics utilized by the Vote Yes lobbyists was obscene in its gratuitous displays of money, with giveaways ranging from cars to houses to food and drinks to TV’s and block parties. Quite honestly, I believe that such displays offended the sensibilities of the average Bahamian—even those that gamble—and set the stage for an outcome that was created in part by arrogance and hubris.

Frankly, I also think that a percentage of the no vote was merely a manifestation of the black crab syndrome. Yes, I said it! And I know that I am not the only person who has had that thought.

I spoke to Wayne Munroe (who also happens to be one of my Bar School tutors) on Thursday and he emphatically stated that the referendum was not about the closure of the web shops. He stressed that the question on web shops had nothing to do with whether it was legal or illegal nor whether they would remain open or be closed. According to Mr Munroe, the no vote related only to the regulation of web shops and, as he prepares to advance his argument before the Chief Justice next week, he stated that that merely means that the Bahamian people have indicated that they would not wish for the government to have oversight of these operations (e.g. ability to specify an age, to ensure that monies generated aren’t used for criminal activities, to pay taxes and ensure that financial statements are properly assessed, to ensure that games are fair, etc). According to Mr Munroe, in his estimation, people voted for web shops to be like the church—“unregulated and untaxed.”

Now that a legal battle is on the horizon, are the Bahamian people also expected to foot the bill for that? And, could the Attorney General’s office be expected to mount a vigorous challenge to any motion filed by the attorneys of the number bosses? Because the governing party seemingly has an interest in the outcome of the case—apparently in support of the referendum questions proffered to the electorate—should the general public demand that a special prosecutor be brought in to handle the matter as the representative of the people?

How much did the consultants from South Africa charge and who paid for it? Where are these South African consultants and who are they now consulting—the number operators or the government? After all, he who pays the Piper chooses the tune!

Look, let’s get real. All of the major political parties (FNM, PLP and DNA) that ran in the last general election promised to hold a national referendum on the gambling issue. Whilst it is likely that each organization would have perhaps taken a different approach to doing so, the fact remains that they all pledged to do the same thing!

Credit must be given to the Church and to the Opposition and its leader Dr Hubert Minnis for defeating what many saw as a referendum with governmental thrust and support even though the PM declared that the government had no horse in the race. Indeed, for both the Church and Dr Minnis/FNM, the moment has been seized and now all parties involved should hunker down with strategists and lawyers to draft the blue print for the way forward as the issue evolves. Over the last two months, Minnis adamantly cautioned and advised Bahamians to vote no if they felt that the questions were too vague or if they were uninformed.

That said, in the end we must move to remove all forms of discrimination from the Constitution, repeal the Lotteries and Gaming Act and ensure that Bahamians can exercise the same fundamental rights—in their country—as a foreigner, whether that relates to gambling or otherwise. I had suggested in this column on two occasions that the referendum include four questions and address the Constitutional prohibition and casino gambling—clearly, my suggestions fell on deaf ears and, beyond the moral convictions of some Bahamians, the electorate felt that the referendum was an intellectually insulting ploy thrust upon them to empower and enrich a favoured few and render political payback.

I am anxiously waiting to see the outcome of round two…..