Time for Commission 2017 on the impropriety of politicians helping operators of casinos and especially the lack of enforcement on money laundering that would have caught not only the culprits but the politicians as well.
Why did Rich Coleman shutter the enforcement branch?
What was 'good' for the BC NDP in 2000 where one party member used money from a non-profit bingo organization in Nanaimo to fund their election chances surely seems minuscule compared to today's activities where instead of community players being shortchanged in thousands of dollars via bingo games Today's BC Liberals assisted in the laundering of Millions of dollars and benefited by having the casino operators donating to their cause.
No wonder corporations need to be banned from donating money to political parties where no means by which it was acquired came from legal sources.
******************
2000
14 THE COMMISSIONER:
Mr. Lewis?
15 MR. LEWIS:
16
Q Mr. Barrett, my name is Geoffrey Lewis I act as
17
counsel for the British Columbia Gaming
18
Commission.
19
A Yes.
20
Q And the question -- series of questions I have
21
for you relate really to your experience with
22
public policy and the history of gaming in the
23
province.
24
A Mh-hmm.
25
Q In the period of your government 1972 to 1975,
0101
1
and then through the '70s as leader of the
2
opposition, say up until 1980 or so, do you
3
recall gaming being a significant matter for the
4
government either in terms of regulation or
5
revenue?
6
A For the government?
7
Q Yes.
8
A Yes. Regretfully I authorized the first lottery
9
structure in British Columbia. It was much to my
10
policy regret that we were instrumental in
11
establishing the 649 program, the scratch and win
12
programs, this was in response at the time to the
13
amount of money that was leaving Canada with the
14
Irish sweepstakes which was substantial.
15
On reflection of these past years I think it
16
was a mistake that I made in my government made
17
along with the other governments that allowed the
18
development of the lotteries corporation. And I
19
regret this. Nothing that I can do will change
20
it but I was instrumental in making that decision
21
and we were instrumental in setting up the first
22
lotteries across Canada.
23
Q In comparison to the types of revenues and the
24
types of activity that exists today would you say
25
it's fair to characterize the level of activity
0102
1
in the '70s as being just a shadow of what it is
2
today?
3
A It certainly is a shadow of what it is today and
4
but however, it was the embryo that's grown in a
5
monster in my opinion.
6
Q In that embryonic stage in the '70s do you recall
7
that the federal government, no doubt you do
8
recall that the federal government was active in
9
the field at that time?
10
A They were active in the field too as well as a
11
number of other provinces.
12
Q And one example that anyone might recall was that
13
the Super Lotto was introduced to help in part
14
fund the Montreal Olympics. Do you recall that?
15
A I recall that. I must add that when we had the
16
opportunity to bid for the winter Olympic games
17
in British Columbia I made a statement that our
18
government would not support a bid for those
19
Olympics because of the financial cost and
20
because of the financing that North America was
21
moving into, not just Canada but the United
22
States, in terms of the financing those kind of
23
operations.
24
Q All right. In the relationship of the federal
25
government with the provincial governments and
0103
1
the identification of source of revenue, sources
2
of taxation sources of levies, am I right in
3
understanding that in our constitutional system
4
the way to governments work in Canada that
5
generally the provinces and the federal
6
government vie for control over sources of
7
revenue with each other?
8
A Well, I don't know if I could use the word vie, I
9
mean, there are competing interests for revenues
10
sources but that's the nature of the B NA and
11
constitution itself. When someone is a
12
provincial politician they think that their
13
jurisdiction is paramount in some areas when one
14
is a federal politician they think that their
15
position is paramount. The taxpayer has to pay
16
no matter whose position is paramount but there
17
is competition obviously and niches and in
18
general policy.
19
Q In 1985 do you recall, and I appreciate at this
20
time that you were no longer a sitting member of
21
the legislature.
22
A Yes.
23
Q But do you recall that in connection with the
24
funding for the Calgary winter Olympics that John
25
Turner made a deal with the provinces that
0104
1
resulted in the federal government agreeing to
2
withdraw from the field of gaming?
3
A I knew that Mr. Turner was considering that. I
4
must say that I enjoyed extremely positive
5
relationship with Mr. Turner when he was federal
6
Minister of Finance, he was a very reasonable
7
honourable person and we did have generalized
8
discussions about whether lottery funds where
9
going because I was a Minister of Finance
10
provincially at the same time. But as far as the
11
Calgary decision it was of no import to me at
12
that time.
13
Q All right. The result in -- I'll tell you
14
because I know -- that was that
the Criminal Code
15
was amended and the permissive sections of the
16
Criminal Code that permit gaming to occur and not
17
be a criminal offence included prior to that time
18
among other exceptions but the principal ones
19
were gaming conducted on behalf of the Federal
20
Crown, gaming conducted on behalf of the
21
provincial crown?
22
A Mh-hmm.
23
Q
And then the charitable exception that gave rise
24
to raffles and bingo and casino and we see exist
25
in the province today in addition to what the
0105
1
provincial government operates through the
2
lottery corporation.
3
A Yes.
4
Q And so in 1985 in return for a funding
5
arrangement and I don't mean this in terms of a
6
contract but there was an arrangement made with
7
the provinces that saw an undertaking and
8
obligation to funneled the winter Olympics in
9
Calgary and the federal government at least
10
withdrew itself from the field?
11
A Mh-hmm.
12
Q Would you agree with the characterization that
13
had the federal government at that time
14
appreciated the many billions of dollars of
15
revenue which are now drawn both to the
16
charitable sector on the provincial government
17
sectors across the country annually, that they
18
wouldn't have withdrawn from the field completely
19
at the price they did had they foreseen what a
20
large economic force gaming was to become?
21 MS. SMITH: How
can that witness answer that question.
22
A Well --
23 MR. LEWIS: Given
his experience.
24
A It's impossible for me to answer that question.
25
Gambling has become so seductive in North America
1
for governments and if I may take off a political
2
hat and put on a social scientist hat I lament
3
very much this dream machine that had been
4
created by the monster.
5
There was a study recently showing that
6
almost one-third of Canadians buy lottery tickets
7
in hopes of winning enough for their retirement
8
rather than save through the RRSPs or other
9
means. In hindsight -- hindsight is always very good, in terms of hindsight on policy I've already said early on I regretted very much the move that I made. But
for governments to regret it today is for governments to cut off an umbilical cord with a monster that provides them money
Search in
BC Legislative Library Horizon for:
Nanaimo Commonwealth Holding Society
Results: 22 hits
http://www.llbc.leg.bc.ca/public/pubdocs/bcdocs/334637/index.htm
eg. BingoGate Barrett testimony
http://www.llbc.leg.bc.ca/public/pubdocs/bcdocs/334637/trans_may03.htm
http://www.llbc.leg.bc.ca/public/PubDocs/bcdocs/377080/bcag_may_5_1998.pdf
|
| News release / Commission of Inquiry into the Nanaimo Commonwealth Holding Society and Uses of Gaming Proceeds. -- | | | | | |
|
|
******
http://web.archive.org/web/20010301203137/www.smithinquiry.com/Pages/news_index.html
