Lotteries proposal

I refer to the news item Unions Object To Lotteries Proposal (August 4).

I would like to express my very personal opinion regarding the comments made by Maltco and by Mario Galea, chief executive of the Lotteries and Gaming Authority.

Maltco states "...that since it operates in a highly-regulated environment, it acts within the regulatory framework that recognises two parties, namely the Lotteries and Gaming Authority as the regulator and Maltco as the National Lottery licensee.

"At this stage, therefore, the company feels it is not appropriate to comment on the subject."

This comment reflects a clear attitude of total disregard for the lotto receivers (agents) as persons, as individuals and also as workers having an important role in the running, to a much desired success, of the company.

It is also a clear statement that Maltco does not believe in the workers' right to be union members. This is not new to lotto receivers.

Mr Galea stated that "...the Authority (LGA) had taken into consideration the social impact, not necessarily the economic one, of the game of lotto and ensured that the game - which had for a long time formed part of the Maltese social fabric - would continue to exist".

Mr Galea is kidding only himself if he believes that re-introducing a very low quota mechanism in lotto considers the social impact. He, of all people, should know that approved proposals will lead punters to shift to illegal gambling... a situation to avoid and that should be at the top of his list of priorities.

These changes are being proposed by Maltco solely for the company's economic/ financial reasons. As a regulating body, LGA should take into consideration, with Maltco's interest, also that of other parties concerned among which are the government, lotto receivers, NGOs and societies that benefit from the Good Causes Fund and the consumer.