At his weekly post-Cabinet news conference at the Office of the President Secretariat, he dismissed suggestions the government is acting unilaterally and like a “thief in the night” by its decision to introduce a bill in Parliament.

According to Luncheon, the government has taken a decision to introduce the Casino Bill in Parliament which is the “ultimate forum” where the merits and demerits of introducing and legalising casino gambling in Guyana can be thoroughly debated and discussed before any final decision is taken.

Acknowledging that consultations on the introduction of casino gambling in Guyana had already started, he said he is “unaware that we announced that consultations started…or have ended”.

“What we have said is that we are going to Parliament with this bill. But if there is some understanding that that means consultations are over, then I think there is a misunderstanding,” he posited.

“We have never said that consultations are over…before a decision is made and before we commit, consultations will and are taking place,” Luncheon declared.

“The idea of some satisfactory level of consultation does presuppose that a signal was given that it has started. And another signal has been given that it has ended. I am not aware about anything the administration has said that such a development has taken place.”

Noting that he has personally been involved in the “reach out” (consultations) to several communities, including the religious community, Luncheon said there has been substantial discourse so far on the merits and demerits of gambling in general and the specific approaches to casino gambling being considered by the administration.

“So I don’t agree and I cannot concede that this consultative process is a done thing. I cannot believe that its subject matter and the details go without being addressed or being ignored and the administration be targeted or lampooned for moving ahead with this initiative to introduce casino gambling in Guyana,” Luncheon argued.

“Our resolve is to take this matter ultimately to Parliament and our resolve is to deal with its merits for the (tourism) industry, the economy, for the development of Guyana and to call on those who are opposed to examine ways in which they could exercise the greatest efforts and resolve in, perhaps, denying or preventing or even encouraging their followers not to participate in gambling, but to recognise that as an initiative of the administration, that it is something to deal with the tourism and hospitality industry, that all over the world these interventions and these initiatives are being offered and being practiced,” he asserted.

In March of this year, when the issue of casino gambling was brought to the fore, President Bharrat Jagdeo had declared his intention of having detailed public consultations with communities and all stakeholders in society before any bill on such activities is put before Parliament.

While recognising that casino gambling - based on the model that is used - can be viewed as an infrastructural facility to attract tourists, the President had assured that there will be no compromise between attracting tourists to Guyana and promoting widespread gambling in the country.

“I will never promote widespread gambling in Guyana,” the President told leaders and representatives from the Christian community during an interactive encounter he hosted on the lawns of his State House residence in Georgetown.

Pastor Marlon Hestick had raised the issue of casino gambling and urged the President not to consider it.

“I stand here to say we shouldn’t consider it and there are several reasons why,” Hestick had told President Jagdeo to applause from fellow leaders and representatives from the Christian community.

“I understand that one of the reasons why the government and the business community engage in the idea of casino gambling is that it will bring revenue and that revenue could be used to ease the pressure and improve the social circumstances of the people, but the evidence does not endorse that, particularly as it relates to the Caribbean,” Hestick said.

He told the President he had taken the time to “research” the issue before raising it with him and outlined some of the negative consequences of casino gambling, which he said includes promises that are rarely ever fulfilled. He also argued that the crime rate tends to rise in areas where there is casino gambling, and that people spend enormous amounts of money at the casinos, money which could otherwise be spent on affecting family life in a positive way.

While acknowledging Hestick’s concerns, President Jagdeo noted: “I have to, in this country, find a balance. I have recognised the concerns about casino gambling (but) I will never promote widespread gambling in Guyana where everyone or anyone can just walk off the streets, enter a casino and gamble like the model used in the United States.”

Alluding to the casino model used in The Bahamas, a popular Caribbean tourist destination with many casinos, the President pointed out that this allows for only the hotel guests to use the casino facilities.

“We have a major issue in Guyana with putting up the infrastructure for tourism (although) we recognise that tourism is one of the biggest growth areas of the future,” the President declared.

He reasoned that many persons, including young people, will gain employment in the tourism sector.

“I have an obligation to develop the infrastructure for tourism and to attract more tourists,” the President said, while explaining that he is looking at the whole issue in the context of the creation of more jobs for Guyanese, from the taxi drivers to the waiters and others working in the hospitality sector.

With an anticipated influx of tourist arrivals in Guyana for Cricket World Cup (CWC) 2007, there have been committed efforts by some developers to provide accommodation for the tourists. This entails the erection of several top class hotels.