Wednesday, March 28, 2007

Casino vote

Personally Manchester would not have been my choice as the site of the super casino, instead I would've like to have seen Blackpool as the venue. However, a decision was made by an independent panel that it should be Manchester and Parliament should have endorsed that decision.

Instead we get a decision endorsing the choice of Manchester by the democratically elected house(despite Conservative opportunism in suddenly opposing the site despite earlier praise for the decision by the Shadow Chancellor George Osborne)and the unelected Lords effectively scuppering the plans. Still it reiterates my view that the Lords should be scraped.

In previous blog postings, I've made my views known on casinos and gambling(basically adopting a Liberal approach) and believe that we should not have had only one super casino. While I respect people who have deep held views against gambling even though I do not agree with their view, I cannot stand opportunists who vote against casinos purely on an opportunistic basis(most though not all of the Tory party). While the Government will no doubt review the matter, thanks to the action of some the whole bidding process will effectively have been a waste of time for many authorities across the country.


Anonymous Anonymous said...

Besides the moral issue of a Labour govt enticing people into gambling knowing full-well that mainly hopelessly poor people tend to gamble more (and more, and run into deeper debts!), it's a damning indictment on Gordon Brown's mismanagement of the Budget balancing skills that he has to raise money from casinos, longer pub hours, and the national lottery! Has New Labour thrown out the baby of socialist political economic principles with the bathwater of Clause 4?

8:14 pm  

Post a Comment

<< Home