In hindsight, for all its unconcealed enthusiasm for the introduction of casinos to the Island, the resolve of the One Bermuda Alliance to test that proposition by way of a referendum never appeared particularly earnest.

The recent announcement, then, that the party would abandon its campaign pledge and take the matter to Parliament instead was perhaps to be expected. Nevertheless, as one of the more charitable Opposition critics said recently, this embarrassing and undying affair will not be recorded as the Government’s finest hour.

Indeed, while the about-face has been cheered by the more committed proponents of casino gambling, it has done great injury to this Government’s credibility.

Election manifestos form a kind of implied contract with the electorate. The promises contained in them, absent compelling intervening reasons to the contrary, ought to be kept. By campaigning on a referendum promise, and repeating that promise several times during its first 12 months in power, the OBA had created a legitimate expectation that the country — and not its politicians — would have the deciding vote. Now it has decided precisely the contrary.

In justifying that reversal, Premier Craig Cannonier alluded once more to the urgent need for jobs as well as investment in our ailing tourism industry. Nobody can seriously doubt these concerns, nor argue that they do not deserve the Government’s most anxious attention. Yet this was no less true a year ago. Why then has it taken until now to change course?

The Premier also hinted vaguely at possible schemes by the Opposition to disrupt and undermine the referendum. It is true that Opposition politicians had strongly criticised the proposed wording of the ill-fated referendum, but that is a long way from threatening to boycott it. Whatever private exchanges may have taken place between the Premier and the Opposition Leader, the decision in response to cancel a referendum that both parties supported in principle can only be described as disproportionate.

The Government’s reversal is particularly disappointing when one considers what is at stake. The promised change to our gambling laws — whatever form it might take, and whatever else might come of it — will very likely have profound societal effects for Bermuda, and not all for the better. There are widespread and justifiable doubts that casinos are suitable for Bermuda, and such reservations tend to transcend traditional political divisions.

To that end, a political consensus developed before the last election, one which recognised that, before institutionalised gambling could be introduced, it should be put to the country. That was entirely fitting, given the difficult moral questions it brought with it. The OBA once recognised as much, which makes last week’s announcement all the more regrettable.

The referendum reversal is also evidence that, after 12 months of power, the OBA continues to create for itself entirely unnecessary problems. It is true that the party came to power with the knowledge that its tenure would be marked by unpopular decisions. To its credit, notwithstanding the constraints it inherited, the Government has ended its first year with a modest record of positive achievements.

Yet the OBA continues to do itself no favours by its habit of creating needless controversy. Twelve months ago, gaming was a policy objective enjoying a rare cross-party support. Twice now the Government has made it a source of fresh criticism, prompting doubts even among its own supporters. These blunders could once be written off as the mistakes of a novice Government. They cannot anymore.

Unless the OBA can end its propensity for self-inflicted harm, the remainder of its time in office is likely to be unhappy — and short.