ledonists vs. oralists in caming debate A MOST curious aspect to the debate over the casino- _ based Seaport Centre devel- opmen: is the issue of how to weigh the value of the public’s opinion on the sub- ject of gambling, By Greg Felton Contributing Writer While supporters and detrac- tors cach claim to speak for “the people,” on the subject, it is abundantly clear that the public’s opinion is largely irrelevant, which is as it should be. There is more at stake here than a simple “yea” or “nay” vote for # casino. If it goes thraugh, Seaport Centre will perraanent!y change the economic face of the province, not to mention what it ‘may mean for Vancouver. _ Whether the change will be for good or for bad, I don’t know, and I know I don’t know. ' But the thought of letting moral- ists and. hedonists duke it out in a “referendum is gambling with our. - future.. The odds of an intelligent - ‘result are longer than winning at the slots. Manning is certainly right about one thing, though: the casi- ” no is not the most important fac- tor, ‘The ramifications of an eco- nomic behemoth on our water- front are far more important. . What, for example, will be the effect on Vancouver’ s hotel industry? Manning says the city needs to quadruple its convention space . - for the coming decades, but who has,determined how much space Vancouver really needs? The same goes for criise ship facilities. On a more mundane level, are we prepared to support the asso- 'eiated infrastructure costs in water, sewage, police and traffic congestion? To these costs there are poten- tial benefits: permanent jobs, inner-city redevelopments, com- munity programs (including pro- grams for gaming addicts), theu- sands.of new, permanent jobs, and gebs and gobs of dough for the provincial bean counters — all brought to you without one thin dime from B.C.’s taxpayers. For 4 province still smarting from Bill Bennett’s publicly funded megablunders like Northeast Coal, a free-enterprise project must seem like a wel- come change indeed. Meanwhile, amid all this socio-economic navel-gazing, whaiever happened to those 70% of surveyed British Columbians in whose name the casino has been justified? Seems like they got lost in the shuffle. That should tell us something: ‘ They don’t matter. In the greater scheme of things the economy of _ this province is what counts; not the self-interest of a group, how- : ever large. Public opinion is s0 much clay to be molded and shaped, and the backers of Seaport Centre have shown themseives to be excellent potters. Full-page -| ads in the North Shore News as well as expensive, professional, glossy promotional kits are designed to persuade the public of the good things about the pro- ject. ; It is, in effect, sophisticated propaganda, as is alt good adver- tising. A referendum will do little more than pass judgment on the project’ s public relations cam- paign. Is that what we want? Surrey. MLA and Liberal garning critic Ken Jones says the legislature should conduct an inquiry into all aspects of gaming and elicit views from all interest- ed parties, cxpert and non- expert alike. At least it may help us find ‘Index BH Classified... stench COMICS woccisseesseseesssense dD BB Doug Collins ......-csececnene dD, BB CTOSSWOLK vesrscsserenererererernn AB " g Day in Court... Foad .. Kids’ Stuff... ieeccscsesee 2 Lifestyles... esses oe |: ET ile), eee) @ News of the Weird..............38 SPOMMS...csseccecsesseee we TA & What's Going On... BB Weather Thursday: expect a mix of clouds and sun. High 20°C low 10°C . Canadian Publications Mail Sates Product Agreement Number 0087238 CALLUS: 983-2208 THE SEAPORT Centre proposed for the Vancouver waterfront includes large casino. The spokesman for a partner in the proposed venture discussed the development in North Vancouver on Saturday. if approved, the facility would change the status of gambting tn the city. Seaport Centre sold as money-maker PAUL MANNING wasted no time in extolling the economic virtues of the planned casino- based Seaport Centre develop- ment at a forum on gambling held Saturday in North Vancouver. a By Greg Felton Contributing Writer Manning, vice-president of pub- lic relations for VLC Properties, a partner in the venture, said it is time people stopped focusing on the - casino planned for the Port of Vancouver and started looking at the bigger picture. “What we have is a development of private investment that provides a great number of jobs, a number of needed public amenities and hap- pens to include a casino,” he said. The proposal came about because of a perceived lack of cruise ship and hotel convention capacity. “We are nowhere near competitive with major conventions going on elsewhere,” While sizes of 7,000 to 10,000 are common, he said Vancouver’s convention capacity can only handle 2,500 peo- ple per day. In laying out the economic bounty that the proposal would bring, he cited: & 11,000 permanent jobs; £4 $256 million in annua! provincial tax revenue; @ redevelopment of the Woodward’s building; and fow-cost social housing. While the casino is not the be-all and end-all of the centre, the entire project depends on it. “The funding wauldn’t be there without the casi- no.” The main fcature of the project is a 150-foot platform, three foot- ball fields long, extending into Burrard Inlet. Manning said there is no market for commercial or resi- dential development on the struc- ture: it’s a casino or nothing. The casino, he added, was always a part of the proposal and is necessary for the private developers to turn a profit. (Mirage Resorts of Las Vegas will have a 49% share with the provincial government having 51%.) Because Manning was the only | proponent of the development at the meeting sponsored by North 66 We have a good charity program and going beyond that gets into real serious problems. 99 ~ Surrey MLA and Liberal gaming critic Ken Jones Shore Liberals, the other two mem- bers of the panel, Surrey MLA and Liberal gaming critic Ken Jones and UBC professor, . Len Henriksson; did not so much oppose the proposal as offer criti- cisms of Manning’s arguments.- Jones took exception to Manning’s claim of public support for the centre. Manning said 70% of British Columbians, in two opin- ion polls, expressed support. Jones argued that the polls prove nothing. “T don’t think you can use a poll as a basis for a referendum; they’re not objective,” he said. “We have - no support for a casino in down-; town whatsoever. We’ve had a lot. of negative reports.” In fact, Jones went so far as to deny that appealing to public opin- ion, in any form, was of any value. “Idon’t think you could put‘a referendum question on this sub- ject. It certainly wouldn’t be possi- ble for the people to make an informed decision on the basis of complex facts.” Some of the issues that need to | THIS WEEK’S QUESTION: Do you favor a user-pay system for water consumption? be discussed include the impact any new legistation will have on native casinos, charity casinos, and other provincial operations. Much of Jones’ comments. cen- tred around his party’s pusit for a House inquiry into gaming. It was here, he said, that the public’could express ail its concerns and engage in a full debate. For his part, Henriksson, speak- ing as a citizen instead of a profes- sor, said a proper cost-benefit. _ analysis had not been done. Citing statistics of previous studies of the sociological effects of gaming, - Henriksson said no study to date has done a proper job of evaluating the matter. - : He: dismissed Manning’s glow- “' ing statistics as misleading because . they represent only, one side of the’ issue: the good side. ) : A casino will inevitably promote ; crime, violence, drugs and prostitu- . tion ‘and before the province goes ahead, it should have a clear idea of what’s at stake, he argued. . Henriksson did not come out against the proposal, but clearly sympathized with its critics. “Isn’t it better to prevent the problem ... instead of hiring more police? Can’t we put a value en living i ina safe community?” When he argued for something else besides a casino, Manning reit-. erated that the cruise ship centre’ ‘and the casino were a package deal. Jones also tried to seem support- ive but despite his emphasis on a board of inquiry, he couldn't hide his basic disagreement. “I, for one, do not feel this city is ready for for- profit casino gambling. We have a good charity program and going beyond that gets into real serious probiems.” Questions from the audience were also skeptical: what will hap- ‘pen to the quality of life in Vancouver? What are the opportu- nity casts? Do we want our citizens to become blackjack dealers?