Something smells fishy about the casino

Somethings in my borough never cease to amaze me.

The latest posting on Greenwich Watch about the status of the casino plans for the dome, are now starting to make me think something isn't right about the process that should be followed when building a venue like this.

According to the post, it appears that the company employed to build the casino, AEG, have already started preparatory building work for the casino, BEFORE plans for it have even been approved by the Casino Advisory Panel. Is this legal? or has Mr Anschutz's company already received a nod froma an old friend that it will be given the green light even though a decision is not expected to be announced until December?

Maybe this could be the reason why the report by PwC won't be published, and that Cllr Fletcher has failed in achieving its publication so far. However, we'll never know as Cllr Fletcher will probably be made to wear concrete slippers in the Thames if he breaths a word of its contents.

The post also goes on to quote, blogger Indigo at Moody Blue in that in the original planning application never even mentioned the casino.

Although when Greenwich responded to questions from the CAP it stated "only part of the scheme will be developed without the casino – there would be no exhibition space, no theatre, no hotels, and a smaller range of outlets. The full scheme is dependent on the inclusion of the casino as an integral and complementary leisure activity ..."(quoted from the Greenwich Watch post).

So at what point did this casino become "an integral" part of the regenaration of the peninsula? Has our council given Prescott's visits to Mr Anschutz's ranch some validity, by this sudden change in stance?

This latest revelation really tarnished the whole plan in my mind. After all it's my Borough that is being ridiculed in the national press.

Something is definetly starting to stink with this whole issue.