Government is sticking by its May, 2001 resolution to "protect the vulnerable and further enshrine in legislation society's approbation of gambling" with the Prohibition of Gaming Machines Amendment Act 2004, said yesterday.

The legislation was first tabled in 2001 with a target date of July 1, 2004 for the banning of all gaming machines.

In an impassioned speech on the floor of the House of Assembly, the Premier affirmed Government's determination as "guardian and protector" to protect the have nots from the Las Vegas-style dangers of legalised gambling.

Saying: "There may be a little spin, but it's in the interests of transparency," Mr. Scott added as it stands the legislation needs "one, two, even three amendments" because gaming technology has advanced since it was first drafted in 2001.

"But our intent is very clear and sure," he said. "Contrary to media reports, the Government's commitment to the most vulnerable within this community and to the overall social well being of this Island has not waned, but instead, it remains steadfast and resolved.

"Research has shown that those who tend to suffer most from gambling related problems tend to be those who are least able to afford their addiction. Those with the limited ability to pay are those who most frequently play."

The result puts Bermudians at risk, he said. "As a responsible Government we cannot afford to stand by and do nothing. Prohibiting gaming machines in Bermuda represents a significant step in the right direction and a proactive attempt by this Government to address a serious issue."

Mr. Scott admitted that when the technology was first tabled Government did not foresee the rapid advances in technology that took place with gaming machines.

Though saying the legislation had been "challenging", Mr. Scott slammed "reporters who can't get day-to-day reporting right" after an article appeared in on Thursday questioning holes in the laws.

"The proposed amendments will capture the present gaming machine technology; provide us with the ability to anticipate new forms of gaming machine technology; address the prospects of a floating casino or gambling ship being introduced into Bermuda; and, most importantly, ensure that effective July 1, 2004 the use of gaming machines to win prize money will be prohibited in Bermuda," he said.

At a later Press conference in the Cabinet library, Attorney General Larry Mussenden clarified how floating casinos will be banned under the amendments.

Cruise ships will be exempted from the law because they come under the definition of "passenger ships", he said: ships which carry passengers from Bermuda to a port outside of Bermuda, and vice versa.

Ships that are based in Bermuda and venture into international waters only to return directly to Bermuda are not defined as passenger ships. "So the whole idea of a floating casino ship based here and travelling outside the 12 mile limit ? this law will make that an offence."

"The penalty is $100,000," Mr. Scott said. "I'm hoping someone takes that chance."

Mr. Mussenden also said the law was designed to stay flexible on the definition of gaming machines, allowing Government to extend that definition "very simply and very easily" as gaming technology continues to advance.

In the House of Assembly, Mr. Scott said it was not Government's intention "to capture home computers or devices that are not considered in the traditional sense of a gaming machine".

"But, that said, if we find going forward that gaming machine operators seek to circumvent the law by utilising what we consider to be household and everyday technology, we will bring forward amendments to address that activity. This Act allows the Government to remain one step ahead of those who would attempt to thwart the system and break the law."

Mr. Scott thanked the technical officers from various Ministries and agencies who have been working together to determine the policy and legal issues involved.

He also vehemently denied rumours that Government may renege on its pledge to ban gaming machines by entertaining discussions on casinos, lotteries and other forms of gambling, saying it was not in Government's best interests to expand the scope of gambling on the Island.

"Based on what we are hearing from our constituents and in recent polls, the majority of people want to keep gambling out of Bermuda," he said.

"Additionally, the introduction of any of these other forms of gambling will significantly impact Bermuda in regards to immigration, housing, and tourism.

"The expertise that is necessary to operate a casino is certainly not presently existent in Bermuda and therefore the opening of a casino will lead to a further influx of foreign workers and therefore put an additional pressure on our fragile housing market.

"As regards tourism, tourists have stated that they do not want to come to Bermuda for gambling."

Even England's Prime Minister Tony Blair left Mr. Scott on a recent trip to Bermuda with "the distinct impression" that he prefers Bermuda without gambling. "We have nothing to gain by proceeding in that manner.

"It should be clear from this position that we have no intention to entertain or propose any new forms of gambling into Bermuda at this time. Why would we put all that we cherish at risk?"

That did not include banning gambling which was considered "part of our culture and tradition" such as bingo, Crown and Anchor, pools and horse racing, however. Mr. Scott said Government was flexible on those issues because "gaming machines, unlike those other forms of gambling, are by their nature intended to induce people to greater gambling".

Quoting from several articles on gambling in the US, including a New York Times article on Las Vegas and an article on the lives of strippers, Mr. Scott said: "It's not an exciting life."

And, in response to comments in the Press from The Beach owner Rick Olson on how the legislation will spark a black market in gambling, Mr. Scott noted that The Beach advertises itself as "The Shame of Front Street".

"Is that the type of image we want for Bermuda?" he asked, as Opposition members responded: "No."

Noting that has "let its hair down" and made its stance clear on the issue of gambling, Mr. Scott maintained his position. "We are standing firm by the cut-off date. At that point all gaming machines will be prohibited in Bermuda."

At the Cabinet library Press conference, Mr. Scott said: "There are those who say, spare me the stories of people who lost the rent money or the food money and are now in financial ruin. Nobody ever dragged them off the street and forced them to gamble.

"That's the voice that I, as Premier, cannot listen to. Gambling is a practice that feeds on losers, and therefore it is an enterprise that we seek to curb within our small community."

Opposition Leader said the UBP supported the principles behind the prohibition. However, he said, the UBP was concerned at the last-minute rush with which the bill was being forced through.

He said he appreciated Mr. Scott's willingness to talk about the bill, but added the extent of the amendments almost made it seem as though the amendments were being completely redone.

"We support this but we don't have the confidence it will do what the bill intends to do."

And Dr. Gibbons called for a blue-chip commission to examine the broader implications of gambling.

"We acknowledge that the community is divided on the issue of gaming. Many are strongly opposed on moral grounds; others are in favour of legalisation to assist tourism or provide entertainment.

"We propose a blue-chip commission, composed of credible members of the community, from different backgrounds, to undertake a comprehensive review of gaming for Bermuda. The Commission would consider the social and economic implications and look at the potential benefit as well as the potential downside."

The Commission would have the power and resources to hire a professional firm to do the research and due diligence required to produce a comprehensive, unbiased report on the issue, he said ? a report which would then be published to allow the public a chance to discuss it.

Then: "We would hold a referendum on gaming, if necessary, after allowing sufficient time for debate."

Although agreed with the Gaming Machines Prohibition Act in principle, he questioned whether measures were in place to assist those with gambling addictions.

"The addiction won't go away just because the machines are no longer there" he said, suggesting that those who are truly addicted might gamble on something as simple as which of two cockroaches might walk across the floor more quickly.

He also said that Government had wasted three years since the previous 2001 Amendment, where they could have engaged the country in "open, mature, sensible dialogue" about whether the community agreed or disagreed with gambling.

"Why do I think it's worth calling a broad public debate?" Mr. Burgess asked. "Because we as a community must search for solutions to our tourism woes."

He suggested that Government could not take credit for this year's improved tourism statistics, stating that Government was "the benefactor of external forces" and the increase in visitors to the island were the result of "circumstances over which we have no control."

Mr. Burgess also said the information the Premier supplied about gambling was taken from the internet about places like Las Vegas, and insisted that research needed to be done locally.

In his final remarks, he said he would support the bill, but added that the "failure to engage the broader community will drive people underground, because addicts will find a way to get their fix."said this Act was somewhat different from the 2001 Act since the earlier Act was framed by very narrow language that didn't take into account advances in technology that could, for example, allow computers and laptops to be used for the purposes of gaming.

He said Government was determined to meet the July 1 cut-off deadline for the prohibition of gaming, and could not understand why the Opposition felt that a public debate was necessary at such a late stage.

But countered: "If a thing is worth doing, it's worth doing right." He suggested that the legislation and the amendment went "a little too far" and suggested that the current drafting may lead to unintended consequences.

He said there were problems inherent in the approach of attacking the machines instead of the behaviour, or the "software instead of the hardware."

Mr. Barritt said his confidence in the wording was "not as high as it should be", and expressed concern about loopholes, stating "what matters is what's in black and white, what the legislation says and doesn't say." mentioned some of the negative effects of gambling, including research which indicated that it victimises the poor, that it cannibalises local businesses, and that it is the fastest growing addiction amongst teenagers.

She added that gaming sets a bad example for children, since it implies that success is rooted in luck rather than hard work, education and determination. said although he has seen gaming machines, he has never used one. However, Mr. Butler said after wrestling with the issue, he had had the opportunity to "think, reflect, and modify" his views on the subject.

Despite his initial views on the subject matter, his opinion had changed as a result of listening to the viewpoints of variety of people including his constituents and visitors.

Although Mr. Butler said it was important to have local research, he said Bermudians were essentially no different from people anywhere else, adding as an example that cigarettes which cause cancer in the US will also cause cancer in Bermuda.

And he said that if loopholes were found circumventing the legislation, "we'll plug it if there's a leak in the dike." recalled personal experiences of how he witnessed changes in some social environments once gaming machines became more popular recently.

And he added that there is evidence to suggest that gaming machines are more attractive to women, perhaps because they are more private and quieter than the more traditionally male pastimes of playing cards or dice.