FIRST an apology - to you, valued reader, and to the Government. Last week I suggested it was a "fair bet'' that intensive lobbying by the gambling industry explained the welcome mat being laid down by the Government for Las Vegas-style casinos in Britain. I should have said it was a "sure bet.''

On the day my piece appeared it emerged that MGM Mirage, the world's largest casino company, had given several presentations to the Treasury. According to reports, the Treasury is still having "ongoing talks'' with the casino industry. Mirage's European managing director has met Lord Levy, Labour's chief fundraiser.

The operator of Caesar's Palace, virtually a synonym for "casino", has also lobbied the Government. And just a month ago, Lord McIntosh, Labour's "culture" spokesman in the Lords, told a gaming industry conference that raising revenue was an aim in attracting the mega casinos.

The Government has denied that intention, even though it stands to rake off about £400m from the super casinos. Rattled by the opposition that its Gambling Bill has provoked, it still claims that 90 per cent of the changes are about regulation. Well, a Bill that outlawed firearms but allowed individuals to keep an unlimited amount of explosives could also be said to be 90 per cent about regulation.

Culture Minister Tessa Jowell now says she is prepared to accept a more "gradual'' approach. That implies the same destination. And the suggested upper limit of 40 super casinos is still likely to mean a large casino targeted at every major town. Ms Jowell doesn't deny that local resistance will be countered by offers to fund community projects. The Government's own estimate of an investment by the casino companies of £5.5bn over the next five years shows how much is at stake.

The British public doesn't want this. But who cares what the British public wants or doesn't want? A cross on a ballot paper once every four or five years, mostly in constituencies where only an earthquake would dislodge the sitting MP, is as nothing compared to the power of lobbying.

Someone asked: why haven't you written about the regional assembly? Answer: because I believe the people of the North-East are sensible enough to recognise a Very Bad Idea when they see one without any prompting from this quarter.

Of course there's never been any doubt that North-Easterners will boot the elected assembly into touch. What probably sealed its fate was the non-stop cavalcade of Government ministers parading round the region bent on persuading the natives what a great thing the assembly would be. "Methinks they protest too much'' has rightly been the overwhelming response.

By rights, Deputy PM John Prescott, Chancellor Gordon Brown, Leader of the House of Commons Peter Hain, Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster Alan Milburn and, especially, Prime Minister Tony Blair should have kept out. For the rules of referendums debar "Ministers of the Crown" from campaigning for a particular result in the month before polling. The readiness of Prezza and the others to stretch the law by officially appearing and speaking simply as MPs, though none seemed to strive unduly hard to make this clear, mirrors the tricksiness that is now generally recognised as a hallmark of Tony Blair's Government.