Anschutz apologises for saying faith group backed bid for 'super-casino'
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.The firm bidding to open Britain's first "super-casino" on the site of the Millennium Dome has apologised after producing a document suggesting that local religious leaders were supportive of the development.
Anschutz Entertainment Group acted after members of the Greenwich Peninsula Chaplaincy complained that the firm had sent a summary of their views to the independent Casino Advisory Panel without clearing it with church leaders beforehand.
The document's "positive" tone sparked anger because members of the multi-faith group had already issued a document critical of the casino plan, ranked the front-runner by the Casino Advisory Panel, which will recommend which proposal for a regional "super-casino" be given the go-ahead later this year.
The document, written by the former Greenwich Council official Rosa D'Alessandro, said that "whilst some of their constituent faiths consider gambling to be incompatible with their faith, they recognise the right to gamble in a free country".
However, a paper written by the chaplaincy insisted that faiths "recognise that gambling can prevent human flourishing and should be avoided".
The Rev Malcolm Torry, co-ordinator of the chaplaincy set up to cater for building workers and future residents on the east London site said that the group included faiths opposed to gambling.
He said: "Muslims are fundamentally opposed to gambling, and the sacred texts of Sikhs, Hindus and Baha'is are similarly negative. Christians and Jews have a variety of views on the issue - you find some Christians fundamentally opposed and others are not.
"We had written a paper last year to explain the view of the different faiths and it came out as pretty negative, of course because the majority of faiths are."
But David Campbell, chief executive of AEG Europe, blamed the dispute on an "oversight" but insisted the matter was closed.
The row is the latest controversy to hit the Anschutz casino bid, which was at the centre of a political storm last month after it emerged that the firm's owner, the American billionaire Philip Anschutz had entertained John Prescott, the Deputy Prime Minister, at his Colorado ranch last year and presented him with a cowboy outfit.
Mr Campbell said: "A summary of what was believed to be the situation was submitted to the CAP. We have apologised to the Chaplaincy that this did not reflect all of their views and was not cleared by their trustees. They understand the circumstances surrounding this oversight, have fully accepted the apology and believe the matter is now closed.
"We have asked that the CAP website is updated where necessary."
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments