6 1 min 9 yrs

Labour’s Ed Milliband; he of the Marxist parents and ‘Strictly Socialist’ upbringing, has made a statement which all sensible people would applaud.

Seems as though the Culture, Media and Sport select committee, came out with a report which advocated further liberalisation of gambling laws.

So adenoidal Ed stands up, and in a direct rebuttal of Labour’s past stances on gambling, casinos, etc, stated that ” I was sceptical about supercasinos originally. Of course there are casinos – and nobody is talking about getting rid of those – but I always thought there must be other routes to economic development and economic growth than through loads more casinos.’

For the first time, a spark of sense from a Labour leader; will we, can we expect more of the same; or will this just be a ‘red’ flash in the Labour pan?

Click to rate this post!
[Total: 0 Average: 0]

6 thoughts on “A new departure?

  1. Oh good. More bread and circuses and exploitation.

    In half the US you see casinos now.

    People entertain themselves by sitting in front of a slot machine and pulling the lever for two hours and jumping for joy if they win $100. No thanks.

    Go outside the casinos in very poor places like Biloxi Mississippi and see all the pawn shops and payday advance clip joints. You too can have that, Britain.

  2. As Phantom wrote – but one thing about the politicos is that they say one thing in opposition then simply continue the same nonsense as their predecessors when they get into what they believe to be ‘power’.

  3. The idea that casinos foster economic growth is so dumb I doubt even Gordon Brown believed that whopper.

    The Labour government promoted them for one reason only: someone was being paid to do so. Someone with links to casino developers and operators and the investment banks behind them was promising cash if the government smoothed the path to more casinos being developed.

    Come on, casinos offend every puritan sensibility which has always run through the Labour Party.

    Miliband’s conversion is also down to one reason only: Labour is out of power, the cash promises have dried up, therefore he’s free to move the party back to its traditional position on gambling.

  4. Casinos can only help the economy of places that are special situaitions or which otherwise have nothing going for them – Macau, Las Vegas, etc.

    But the downside is huge – including exploitation of the desperate poor and near-poor. The locals in Nevada often refer to their city as ” Lost Wages “, for a reason.

  5. The “super casino” idea was ridiculous and shows how over centralised Britain is.

    The government decided that a fixed number of casinos would be built and then local authorities had to beg for the rights to host one- in the deluded belief that they will endow their god forsaken towns with a Las Vegas stlye glamour.

    The casinos would be spread far and wide to make the idea of a tourism hub being created unlikely yet still ensuring that they were available enough to feed the addicts.

    The places that have used gambling as springboards to build wider tourist industries didn’t take such a absurd approach.

  6. For the first time, a spark of sense from a Labour leader

    No, Miliband was ahead of the curve when he denounced Murdoch for the rampant criminality (phone hacking, bribery, cover-ups, lies and more lies) of his media empire last year, while the Tories cowered in fear. And more recently when he denounced the banksters for their arrogance, greed and unrestrained thieving.

    Both conversions late in the day after the years of New Labour toadying, but still welcome.

Comments are closed.