I am a student of the free enterprise but before I proceed,
the pundits will say that there is nothing like free enterprise. I am not a
gaming enthusiast but if we have constitutional provisions and legal
instruments endorsing its existence then we as a nation are in support of the
business of gaming. Businesses will take what they can get away with. Therefore
it is incumbent on the public authorities to safeguard and mitigate the
inherent social ills associated with this particular business activity. Morality
cannot be legislated, but can be put under scrutiny thereby creating public
order. It's an established fact that the poor and vulnerable form the crust of
this gaming market. My concerns however are to do with minors entering gaming
rooms and betting shops. Once again we put the cart before the horse by
allowing investors to invest in an activity we clearly don't understand and the
solution is not an outright ban but a phasing out of the sector if government
deems it imperative to stop gaming as a public policy decision which is a prerogative bestowed to the executive and public policy executioners.
Foreign Direct Investment is a critical caveat for economic
growth therefore anything that taints or erode investor confidence should be
averted. Public policy should not be ad hoc but rather planned and orchestrated
in a systemic manner. I hope we find a convergence and consensus that mitigates
the social ills associated with the sector and safeguard the investors’
interest. Our decision matrices should be devoid of emotional sentiments and
sociocultural inhibitors. With the provision of better data services by
internet providers and online payment systems, these gaming companies will
morph into virtual companies and their clientele will still use the services
and receive winnings through these online payment systems once an out right ban is effected. This makes the business of gaming in the Gambia an offshore activity that yeild no revenues for the state coffers. Imagine Samba
betting on Manchester United versus Chelsea game using pay pal and he happens to bet
right and the company text him a western union code to pickup his winnings then
nothing has changed in terms of protecting the public interest. Development
comes with a price tag and we can't have our cake and eat it. We are third
world people with first world problems but in the first world they resolve
these problems with stringent regulatory measures and guidelines. All is not
lost.
Being third world people with
first world problems, we tend to refuse first world solutions to our ailments due to
cultural inhibitions. Gaming especially sports betting has become a
complimentary product that accentuates professional sports
especially football. This is a global phenomenon that cannot be ignored due to
the revenues and the public interest it commands. Going forward, we need a
consensus to accommodate gaming but with stringent oversight by an independent
authority sanctioned by the state. Society has many ills and shying away from
them does not address the situation. A policy of engagement and mitigation
supported by serious public awareness campaigns are the only measures that can
sanitize the environment. Lotteries in most countries fund education. Therefore
a vice can be harnessed to a beneficial good to society. Public policy has to
be medium term focused and consistent with programmes that factor in the aspirations of the
governed. This makes policy makers our customer care managers whose jobs are to satisfy our socioeconomic needs with an optimal outlook. Finally, an outcome can be reached where no one can be made better off by making someone worse off and this optimal scenario as stated by the famous Italian macro economist Vilfredo Federico Damaso Pareto is not an elusive quest but rather a consensus building paradigm which involves engaging all stakeholders in furtherance of the interest of the greater good of society. My
school of thought is very liberal and tolerant to business so long as
society's interest is factored in the decision matrix. Public policy
practitioners are paid to formulate policy for the interest of the
greater good. The sooner we realize that we do not live in a cocoon and
we are not insulated from the global economy and the vestiges of
globalization, the sooner we will position our country to not only
benefit from the gains of globalization but also mitigate our exposures
to some of these global ailments. We cannot afford to disengage from the
global realities especially in the new frontiers of the service economy.
