The latest in a long series of debates on the relaxation of Bermuda’s gambling laws has been greeted with more than a hint of languid indifference from the public. We might blame this apathy on over-familiarity — this is one of the perennial what-ifs of Bermudian politics, mooted in various forms periodically and without success for decades now.A more likely explanation, however, is that with a referendum promised by year’s end, almost nothing is yet known about what precisely Bermudians are to vote on. Faced with a looming choice, but still in the dark, locals are understandably bemused. That is a pity, since whatever the public is asked to approve will be no small undertaking.Rather, it would entail among other things the creation of an entire regulatory and oversight apparatus from scratch and a major overhaul of our global tourism brand. It will also require Bermuda to engage in a most difficult balancing act: how to weigh the economic possibilities of casinos with their attendant social costs. If Bermudians are indeed to have their say on gambling this year, that is all to the good. Referendums, although costly, lend democratic legitimacy to difficult political decisions and have a certain “settling effect” on controversial subjects (witness the Independence debate since 1995).But ill-informed participatory democracy does nobody any good. Before rushing the country headlong into a decision, Government must give some notion of what a “yes” vote will mean.The Tourism Minister has gone some way to illustrate his own vision. In June, he told an American travel publication that he favoured a “high-class, high-roller type of atmosphere” modelled on Monte Carlo. That is fine as far as it goes, but questions abound: just how many casinos could Bermuda realistically sustain? If casino licenses are to be issued, how many, to whom and on what criteria? How would our gambling industry be kept fair and untainted by money laundering?Would Government adopt the recommendations of the 2009 Green Paper or else start afresh? Most pressing of all, however, is how we manage the immense societal burden that would accompany legalised gambling. It is a truth seldom acknowledged by gaming advocates, that casinos, which trade on manufactured glamour, often pay out only in misery.The familiar libertarian response that people should be free to waste their money as they please misses a broader point: individuals and families suffer the devastating consequences of addiction and bankruptcy, but so too do the communities around them.Short of adopting the Bahamian approach of banning locals from the casino floor altogether, what can be done to mitigate these social harms? Will Bermudians simply be asked to accept them as the regrettable side effects of an economic necessity? Or should Bermudians vote on exactly the kind of prohibitions the Bahamas put into place in the 1960s?Despite initial resistance by church groups and other activists, today there appears to be either tolerance or a general acceptance by Bahamians of casinos as a key facet of that country’s tourism product. While Bahamians cannot participate as gamblers, they are fully involved as casino employees and also work in related satellite industries.Such are some of the questions the country must grapple with in the coming months.BEST, the sustainability advocacy group, has already made an admirable contribution with its recent thoughtful and thorough position paper. Bermuda would be well served by a public discussion with contributions of that quality from both sides.Such a debate is unlikely, however, until Government reveals it own hand. Of course, no one can accuse the One Bermuda Aliiance of introducing all this by surprise or without a mandate. But while election promises may be confined to bullet points in a manifesto, the business of governing requires something more substantial.In a short time, Bermudians will be asked to wager on their future. They ought to be informed of the stakes — and soon.