Devon Dick

Recently, the Minister of Tourism stated that those who opposed casino gambling are hypocrites and later added that casino gambling is a done deal for Jamaica. Even if church leaders are hypocrites on the issue of gambling it does not necessarily invalidate their arguments.

Casinos seem to be a bad idea for Jamaica for many reasons. For one, it is a bad marketing strategy. It robs us of having a distinctive marketing niche. It will lump us with so many destinations that have casinos. It was always far better to be like Cuba and Cancun who were the only destinations without casinos and who did very well. To brand Jamaica as a casino destination would be a backward marketing strategy. There is a vast difference between a visitor who gambles, as is the case now, and trying to turn Jamaica into a place where gamblers visit. In other words Jamaica is a destination where persons who are homosexual visit, but it is quite a different kettle of fish to make Jamaica a homosexual market. Definitely, there is ample opportunity for the visitor who wants to gamble. However, what apparently is being sought is to go after gamblers, seasoned professional gamblers who follow casinos. This will change the image of Jamaica.

Development

In 2004, the then government as a result of the meeting with private sector leaders at the Ritz Carlton, put in train the development of a Jamaica Music Revue to enhance the tourism product. Basil Dawkins, a leading playwriter did a script. Jamaica, the home of reggae, does not have a year round music revue and we want instead to showcase foreign casinos.

Also in 2004, a study commissioned by the then government for its industrial policy revealed that Jamaica will have competitive advantage in marketing its culture, hence garnering much revenue. It would make better sense to brand Jamaica either as a reggae destination or a heritage destination, but not a casino destination.

When the Tony Blair government in the UK introduced a bill on gambling the opponents opposed this bill because it is claimed that it would lead to the proliferation of casinos and attendant ills. Guess which institution opposed this bill? All the major newspapers in the UK! The media in the UK are known for in-depth research.

In 2003, tourism officials invited some church leaders to listen to a professor who specialises in casino research. The professor gave a balanced presentation about the pros and cons of casinos. He also outlined the conditions under which introducing casinos would make sense. For example, the professor said it would only make sense to introduce casinos if persons who visit the island, leave with disposable income that could be used at casinos. Where is the study, which answers that condition and the other conditions necessary for casinos to make sense? In addition, there is potential for corrupting the police force and for money laundering.

The only survey that has been made public was one done by pollster, Don Anderson. On July 7, 2004 Don Anderson shared the results of a survey on the viability of Jamaica hosting a Jamaica Music Revue. Don Anderson also found that when cruise ship and stop-over visitors in Jamaica were asked what other facilities they would like to be associated with this musical treat, not even one visitor wanted casinos!

If I was sure I could use inelegant language like our chief servant and get away with it, I would tell you what has happened to some persons brains' but since puss and dog don't have the same luck, all I would say is that the idea to introduce casinos is a 'no-brainer'.