The lockdown period may have brought a lot of economic activity to a halt, including the casinos – offshore and onshore – but the casinos are never far from the government’s mind. In a cabinet meeting one of the decisions taken was the extension to the offshore casinos to remain in the River Mandovi for another six months. This has become a routine decision by the cabinet taken twice a year in March (delayed this year) and in September, granting the vessels another six monhts to operate in the river. In effect, this has almost turned into a permanent place for the casino vessels, that effortlessly get the clearance for their extended stay in the river.
A year ago, during the campaign for the Panjim by-election, Atanasio (Babush) Monserrate, then a Congress candidate, had promised to get rid of the casino vessels from the river within 100 days of being elected. He was elected as MLA, even shifted allegiance to the BJP less than two months later, but even 11 months after the bypoll there has been no progress made in finding a new location of the casino vessels, and they remain floating in the river. As per the cabinet’s latest decision, they will remain in the river another six months, but given past history and the fact that there is no consensus on an alternative site, they will stay in the river a long time more.
The simple reason why the stay of the casinos in the river gets extended is that there is no political will to move them out from where they are currently anchored. The issue of a site for the casino vessels has plauged successive governments. Previous governments of Late Manohar Parrikar and Laxmikant Parsekar resorted to the same temporary measure of extending the stay of the casinos in the river. A permanent solution has been elusive, and given the mood of the people in the State, no village or town is likely to welcome the vessels in their neighbourhood. A few years ago the government had identified the Sancoale Bay area as a possible site to relocate the casino vessels, but even before the administration could take any further steps on this, the suggestion itself was met with stiff oppostion from the people of the area.
In an attempt to show that the government was serious, there was another proposal to shift the vessels to Aguada Bay, which was not practical from the viewpoint of the vessel owners as the rough waters would upset the stability of the boats that are primarily engineered for the river and not the sea. The possible opposition of the people notwithstanding, the government needs to seriously find an alternative site for the vessels. At least in public, the casino owners have agreed to move, but then the solutions that have been suggested are few, which makes the possibility of the casinos remaining in the River Mandovi a long term possibility.
It all boils down to political will. No government intends to disturb the casino lobby in the State, so it is unlikely that the vessels will move from the River Mandovi. Yet, the government also does not make this a permanent site for the offshore casinos, aware that this would not go well with the people. So it takes the route of a six-month extension that in reality fools nobody, but at the same time allows the government to make its periodic statements of moving out the vessels. It should, however, be of interest to all parties – government, casino owners and people – that a firm decision on this is taken to end the ambiguity on the issue. But, will it ever be taken?
