From Chris Fairbairn.
LIFE is a gamble, well so some say, and a most disturbing call from my ‘honest bookie’ from St John, combined with the letter to the Editor from Will Stewart (JEP, 2 October) calling for a casino to be set up in the Island, made me think.

The matter of a casino has been debated as many times as there has been a good spud season, and was rejected each and every time. We missed the bus in the 1960s when the idea first was debated, as in those days very few casinos existed outside of Europe, and at a time when a Jersey casino would have added to that lovely new expression ‘the holiday experience’ it fell at the first fence.

It was also a time when we needed investment in the tourism infrastructure. Nowadays, most UK towns have a casino within a 200 mile radius, so any novelty value has diminished.

Not only have we voted out a casino, but also the States rejected the introduction of commercial bingo, and so far have missed the second bus on on-line gaming, letting Alderney make all the gains. What remains, and has remained since the Gambling Law came into being in the mid 1960s are 29 betting offices, except for a proposition for the introduction of Type 2 gaming machines which will become available if the forthcoming Proposition P140/2009 is approved. Nevertheless, a costly Shadow Commission which was established in December 2006 now wants to be made official to oversee them.

The States are being asked to vastly increase the licence fees that 29 betting offices currently pay which in the past has reflected the RPI only in order to fund the proposed Gambling Commission, the proposal for which is contained in Proposition P139/2009.

The Shadow Commission, whose very part-time members currently get paid £12,000 a year for less than a half a dozen meetings annually, and whose chairman resides in the UK, receives almost £50,000, plus generous travel and accommodation expenses, to oversee the lot. It also requires a suite of offices to operate from. No doubt at present, it uses one of the department’s offices to hold meetings.

The additional cost, apart from the hike in fees, would come from a 2% tax on turnover of each of the 29 betting shops. The expected running costs of the Gambling Commission are excessive, which apart from absorbing all the revenue from the Industry’s licence fees will also require an annual £225,000 States grant with apparently little explanation as to its expenditure.

If we had a casino, a Gambling Commission would be necessary as the large turnover of its transient staff would require checking and licensing, but with just the same amount of betting offices since the mid-sixties, its role would be limited.

The local gambling industry has a good record of self regulation, and retains an excellent relationship with both the courts and the police, forged over many years with successive Gambling Control Committees, and has retained an open and free line of liaison – both ways – which once cost very little in terms of staffing and cost.

Maybe that was why my friendly ‘bookie from up north’ was so incensed when he called me today. His words have been rehashed to protect the innocent, but the main thrust of the conversation was roughly like this:

‘Chris, my boy, they want to put me out of business. They propose to double our fees and tax our turnover just to pay for the Gambling Commission; come back my boy all is forgiven!’ An unexpected plea from my past life, possibly?

If ever there was a waste of valuable, much needed cash to run our Island, surely it must be right now. Does the Island really want to gamble on this one, as it appears to be doing with WEB? I sincerely hope not.