Editorial
Keep this region casino-free
Editorial cartoon by PERRY
Kill it, Kitchener council. Kill the casino proposed for Waterloo Region.
You have the opportunity — a vote on Monday to say yea or nay to a gaming establishment in your city. You have the best of reasons. It’s not worth betting the future of the vibrant and progressive community of Waterloo Region on such a risky venture. And now, it appears, you have the power.
In response to an avalanche of local political opposition, Ontario Premier Kathleen Wynne raised the stakes in the casino debate this week when she ordered the Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corporation to rethink its handling of the casino venture in Waterloo Region. In February this newspaper urged her to review a process that pitted governments and communities against each other. We are pleased that she is doing so.
Until now, developers seemingly had a green light to build a gaming establishment in Woolwich Township. That’s because Woolwich council voted in March to host a casino. According to the rules by which the gaming corporation had been playing, Woolwich’s decision meant a casino could open its doors in the township — regardless of what the rest of the region thought.
Had those rules held, there might have been an argument for Kitchener to put out its own welcome mat. After all, if a casino was coming to the region anyway, possibly just a few kilometres east of the city, why wouldn’t Kitchener accept one within its own boundaries? At least then it could claim a cut of the revenue — millions of dollars a year — that would compensate it for the social ills a gaming establishment would bring.
But the premier’s intervention changed this. Now there’s every reason to think that if Kitchener rejects a casino, the proposal will die — not just in the city but in the entire region.
Most local governments are already standing shoulder to shoulder against a casino. Cambridge, Waterloo and Wilmot Township all spurned the offer of one. In a gutsy move this week, Waterloo regional council voiced its moral opposition to a gaming establishment. If Kitchener lines up with these other governments, Woolwich will be the lone voice favouring a casino within this provincially designated gaming zone. And the tide of opposition could sweep the casino proposal from every table.
This newspaper does not oppose all gambling. When controlled and regulated by government, it is a legitimate form of recreation for adults. And Ontario has for many years allowed a limited number of casinos to operate in the province.
This newspaper is, however, alarmed by the provincial government’s policy of promoting a massive expansion of gambling, both in casinos and through online betting. The Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corporation’s stated goal is to increase its gambling revenues by $1 billion a year. New casinos are proposed for London, Woodstock, Hamilton and Toronto, as well as this region.
We all know gambling causes enormous pain and suffering. It bankrupts individuals. It tears families apart. Even casino advocates admit this. Dr. Liana Nolan, the region’s chief medical officer of health, estimates a casino would create 10,000 new moderate to severe problem gamblers in Waterloo Region, Guelph and Centre Wellington. “It’s better to prevent these problems by not having (a casino) in the first place,” she concludes.
Casino boosters might say the doctor is exaggerating. But why gamble that she’s wrong? Ontario should not increase its reliance on casinos to pay for the province’s schools and hospitals.
As for the business case, the jury of economists is out on whether casinos help or harm a local economy. Some small and economically depressed communities benefit from casinos, and Brantford is one that has. But Waterloo Region has one of the most dynamic economies in Canada.
Yes, a casino would create new jobs. Yes, it would attract visitors to the region — though its potential for boosting local tourism would be reduced if all the other proposed casinos open across the province. Meanwhile, Rob Simpson, former chief executive officer of the Ontario Problem Gambling Research Centre, estimates that even after all its benefits are tallied, a casino would suck $129 million a year out of the local economy.
Mark Bingeman, chief executive officer of the sports and recreation centre that bears his family’s name, has put forward a tempting proposal for a hotel and convention centre that could also include a casino. Yet even this more palatable idea from a respected business leader cannot convince us a casino should find a home in this region.
Premier Wynne is watching and listening. As leader of a minority government that could fall at any time, and with only one out of four provincial seats in this region held by the Liberals, she needs friends and is willing to do something to make them.
There are 11 votes on Kitchener council. On Monday, these votes should hammer 11 nails in the coffin of a local casino.
You have the opportunity — a vote on Monday to say yea or nay to a gaming establishment in your city. You have the best of reasons. It’s not worth betting the future of the vibrant and progressive community of Waterloo Region on such a risky venture. And now, it appears, you have the power.
In response to an avalanche of local political opposition, Ontario Premier Kathleen Wynne raised the stakes in the casino debate this week when she ordered the Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corporation to rethink its handling of the casino venture in Waterloo Region. In February this newspaper urged her to review a process that pitted governments and communities against each other. We are pleased that she is doing so.
Until now, developers seemingly had a green light to build a gaming establishment in Woolwich Township. That’s because Woolwich council voted in March to host a casino. According to the rules by which the gaming corporation had been playing, Woolwich’s decision meant a casino could open its doors in the township — regardless of what the rest of the region thought.
Had those rules held, there might have been an argument for Kitchener to put out its own welcome mat. After all, if a casino was coming to the region anyway, possibly just a few kilometres east of the city, why wouldn’t Kitchener accept one within its own boundaries? At least then it could claim a cut of the revenue — millions of dollars a year — that would compensate it for the social ills a gaming establishment would bring.
But the premier’s intervention changed this. Now there’s every reason to think that if Kitchener rejects a casino, the proposal will die — not just in the city but in the entire region.
Most local governments are already standing shoulder to shoulder against a casino. Cambridge, Waterloo and Wilmot Township all spurned the offer of one. In a gutsy move this week, Waterloo regional council voiced its moral opposition to a gaming establishment. If Kitchener lines up with these other governments, Woolwich will be the lone voice favouring a casino within this provincially designated gaming zone. And the tide of opposition could sweep the casino proposal from every table.
This newspaper does not oppose all gambling. When controlled and regulated by government, it is a legitimate form of recreation for adults. And Ontario has for many years allowed a limited number of casinos to operate in the province.
This newspaper is, however, alarmed by the provincial government’s policy of promoting a massive expansion of gambling, both in casinos and through online betting. The Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corporation’s stated goal is to increase its gambling revenues by $1 billion a year. New casinos are proposed for London, Woodstock, Hamilton and Toronto, as well as this region.
We all know gambling causes enormous pain and suffering. It bankrupts individuals. It tears families apart. Even casino advocates admit this. Dr. Liana Nolan, the region’s chief medical officer of health, estimates a casino would create 10,000 new moderate to severe problem gamblers in Waterloo Region, Guelph and Centre Wellington. “It’s better to prevent these problems by not having (a casino) in the first place,” she concludes.
Casino boosters might say the doctor is exaggerating. But why gamble that she’s wrong? Ontario should not increase its reliance on casinos to pay for the province’s schools and hospitals.
As for the business case, the jury of economists is out on whether casinos help or harm a local economy. Some small and economically depressed communities benefit from casinos, and Brantford is one that has. But Waterloo Region has one of the most dynamic economies in Canada.
Yes, a casino would create new jobs. Yes, it would attract visitors to the region — though its potential for boosting local tourism would be reduced if all the other proposed casinos open across the province. Meanwhile, Rob Simpson, former chief executive officer of the Ontario Problem Gambling Research Centre, estimates that even after all its benefits are tallied, a casino would suck $129 million a year out of the local economy.
Mark Bingeman, chief executive officer of the sports and recreation centre that bears his family’s name, has put forward a tempting proposal for a hotel and convention centre that could also include a casino. Yet even this more palatable idea from a respected business leader cannot convince us a casino should find a home in this region.
Premier Wynne is watching and listening. As leader of a minority government that could fall at any time, and with only one out of four provincial seats in this region held by the Liberals, she needs friends and is willing to do something to make them.
There are 11 votes on Kitchener council. On Monday, these votes should hammer 11 nails in the coffin of a local casino.
http://www.therecord.com/opinion/editorial/article/932446--keep-this-region-casino-free
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment