Dear Editor,
Lawlessness in Guyana seems to be the order of the day in spite of the new government’s commitment to aggressively pursue corruption in all its forms. I look forward to the day when the State Asset Recovery Bill is passed, so that action can be taken against the many, whose names are publicly known, who have stolen, exploited and corrupted Guyana.
I was shocked to read Clifton Bacchus’s defence of his potential casino on Church Street which is situated next to a mosque and two churches. His first argument shows a lack of principle that is a feature of many businessmen in Guyana. After indicating he has employed 50 people for the last four years, he states the project has a memorandum of understanding with the previous government for “the grant of certain facilities, including a casino’s licence”.
Can Mr Bacchus state who signed the MOU on behalf of the government?
Additionally, is the hotel being built just to obtain a casino licence given the low occupancy rates of hotels in Guyana? Hopefully Mr Bacchus knows that with FATF and the AML/CFT Bill, and the current National Risk Assessment currently underway, the Gaming Board in Guyana will have to address new international requirements for any new casino licence holders. He should remember that an MOU is not a licence.
Regardless of Mr Bacchus’s letter, here are some facts why a licence should not be given to this hotel.
- The Marriott was scheduled to cost US$43 million. The recent audit showed the Marriott was a poster boy for broken laws. Instead of US$43 million, the Marriott cost Guyanese taxpayers a whopping US$98 million. The only way the Marriott will ever be profitable in Guyana is if it has a casino licence.The Marriott would forever be a burden on the people and Government of Guyana without a casino.
Why would any sane government, much less the Government of Guyana dedicated to transparency, stolen assets recovery, the stopping of money laundering and other corrupt practices, grant a licence for a casino in a hotel, when it has a massive Marriott problem created by the same government that gave Mr Bacchus an MOU.
- This building at Oronoque and Church Street is in a residential area. There is no parking. So to compare the casino at the Princess Hotel with this new building is nonsense. The Marriott and the Princess had to have plans for parking in their upfront designs. Why wasn’t this done for this Church Street hotel/casino? This alone would have disqualified the casino on Church Street.
Where will the users of this casino (if it ever becomes one) or hotel park?
Across the street from the would-be casino is Merriman Mall. One now understands why the Pan African Group had to resort to meeting with the President and many City Hall officials to protect this land that was given to them decades ago from becoming a parking lot. Of course, Clifton Bacchus will say he had nothing to do with this attempt to remove the Pan African Guyana (Branch) Organization from the Merriman Mall.
The Marriott and Princess Hotels were deliberately built in spaces that would have parking.
Who cares about Mr Bacchus’s explanation of Suriname having 25 casinos? This is Guyana and we need to bring back the rule of law. Holland has a casino at its main airport. This is the Dutch way. New York doesn’t have casinos in the city and certainly not next to churches, mosques and schools.
The other arguments put forward by Mr Bacchus are morally and economically flawed, for example, “Others are doing it”. For him, the end justifies the means.
Clearly Mr Bacchus and his friends should reflect on the type of society the last 23 years has brought Guyana. Where are our religious leaders on this matter? Still sleeping?
Yours faithfully,
Eric Phillips
