Welcome to Gambling Watch Global Community Blog,
a source for latest news, developments and reputable documentation and research on gambling. You'll find many helpful resources and links for anti-gambling advocates.
1/7/2010:
Que. in gambling addiction treatment deal: report
By CBC News January 7, 2010
http://license.icopyright.net/user/viewFreeUse.act?fuid=NjQzMzI3Nw%3D%3D
A settlement may be in the works between the Quebec government and Loto-Québec in a legal battle over the cost of treating people with gambling addiction, according to a published report.
A settlement may be in the works between the Quebec government and Loto-Québec in a legal battle over the cost of treating people with gambling addiction, according to a published report.
La Presse said Thursday that the provincial government has agreed to reimburse treatment costs for problem gamblers between 1994 and 2002.
The agreement reportedly settles the class action lawsuit brought against Loto-Québec in 2001.
The case went to court in 2008 and was supposed to wrap up in the next couple of months.
The lawsuit sought about $1 billion in damages.
The settlement will reportedly cost the provincial government around $50 million
No reader comments yet - add yours See related articles: Addiction and Recovery, Canada, Litigation 
bill clark1/7/2010:
Que. in gambling addiction treatment deal: report
By CBC News January 7, 2010
http://license.icopyright.net/user/viewFreeUse.act?fuid=NjQzMzI3Nw%3D%3D
A settlement may be in the works between the Quebec government and Loto-Québec in a legal battle over the cost of treating people with gambling addiction, according to a published report.
A settlement may be in the works between the Quebec government and Loto-Québec in a legal battle over the cost of treating people with gambling addiction, according to a published report.
La Presse said Thursday that the provincial government has agreed to reimburse treatment costs for problem gamblers between 1994 and 2002.
The agreement reportedly settles the class action lawsuit brought against Loto-Québec in 2001.
The case went to court in 2008 and was supposed to wrap up in the next couple of months.
The lawsuit sought about $1 billion in damages.
The settlement will reportedly cost the provincial government around $50 million
No reader comments yet - add yours See related articles: Addiction and Recovery, Canada, Litigation
bill clark12/23/2009: OLG up for sale?
Betting is on the OLG to be shopped around
“Liberals will sign deal with banks to access value of lottery agency.”
The Liberal government will sign a $200,000 deal with two investment banks within days to do “preliminary research” on privatizing all or part of the problem-prone Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corporation, the Star has learned.
While Bay Street has been tantalized by millions in lucrative commissions from the possible sale of the Liquor Control Board of Ontario, Hydro One, and Ontario Power Generation, informed sources say the provincial lottery monopoly is the main public asset in play.
Premier Dalton McGuinty is “displeased” by the performance of the troubled gambling agency, which makes it an easy target for sale to alleviate some of the province’s record $24.7 billion deficit.
I find it interesting, the words price or cost are not in the poli-speak. Value is a strange word to use.
We hear conflicting numbers from OLG.
They are always swift to publish how much many dollars they give back to a community, how much they buy, how many jobs are created. We never hear how many dollars leave the community, we don’t hear how many jobs are lost to support new gambling jobs. We continuously hear “only 1 % of people are affected.”
Yes 1 % is a small number but one percent of Ontarians could well be 120,000 souls, and in this we are even told in 2004, by the head of CAMH, tells the minister of Health that the number is closer to 500 thousand souls in trouble with gambling addiction.
That is a large number, and 5 to ten extra people affected for each gambling addict.
The OLG message is to sell the idea that “less is more”. The more money leaves a community, the better off we are. And a lot of money leaves a community. A lot of money leaves the country.
Well, the other item to flog is the LCBO. I call it the “Liquor Promotion Board of Ontario”.
In my 40 plus years in community pharmacy, I have to ask if a more destructive poison exists.
4 % of all deaths are alchohol related. CAMH numbers.
A direct cost of close to 500 dollars for every soul in Ontario, not to mention the serious side effects.
We won’t even mention tobacco addiction. So we are left with alcohol addiction, and gambling addiction, we are selling off the very products that contribute the most costs to what we call a health system.
OUR own crown corporations, convert tax paying citizens into service needy addicts. Alcohol and gambling may well be two 2 worst products for addiction and fatal consequences, and the most heavily advertised and promoted. Can any society really afford this insanity ? Can we afford to lose complete control, or will we really sit down and look at value, costs, consequences, and the destructive direction we are heading. Somewhere, duty of care ?
The lottery corporation contributes $1.8 billion a year to provincial coffers and has a book value of $3.4 billion – including $2.4 billion in property, facilities and equipment.
…”If all we want is a revenue stream (from gambling proceeds) then why can’t we let someone else run it? It’s painfully evident that the model created 10 to 15 years ago has had its day,” said a Liberal.
12/17/2009: OLG Profit comes from citizen losses
Wow! Wednesday December 2nd, 2009 there is a full half page colour advertisement OLG again.
“We’re not required to conduct 90,000 tests on our slot machines.
But we do it anyway“.
Well, when the slots reach the customer, we find out if they work.
A Toronto newspaper under “FOI” (Freedom on Information Act) published the results of the top 10 slots at Woodbine Racetracks in Toronto.
The slots really work. I mean, really.
The top slot pulled in $ 701,117, but it took 294 visits in a 12 month period. This means a loss of $ 2400 per visit.
The # 2 player only visited 92 times but his loss was $ 635,921 for an average loss of 6913 dollars per visit. (top loss/visit)
The # 3 on the list fed in 620,884 dollars or 149 sessions, for an average loss of 4167 dollars per visit.
The top 10 “players“, lost a total of 4,665,000 dollars over the 12 month period August 1, 2008 to July 31 2009. or, an total of 1608 visits.
So, the average visits to Woodbine were 161 times in the year.
The total losses don‘t work out because there are perks, and comps, and other incentives, and we are not told how much these convert to increase the player loss.
If we relate to the Hamilton player who gambled over $ 600,000, of his mothers money, and OLG acknowledged 130,000 dollars in comps over a 10 year period. Prorated to nearly the 5 million dollars for the top 10 slot players losses at Woodbine, this might add up to another one million dollars paid to keep their addiction alive and well.
If we call these visits “sessions or $E$$ION$“, with the help of ’attends’, (Depends) the adult type diapers, some sessions go to 5 hours, some go to 30 hours. Some play one single slot at a time, some play 2 slots, and I have seen many players managing 3 slots all at once, with no let up in speed or feed time.
Regardless, 160 plus visits , and a loss rate per visit close to 4000 dollars prompts handsome rewards. Well, how does one afford this high loss level ? He nips out at noon, and robs a handy bank. Maybe 23 of them. This exchange robber got 6 years in prison for his addiction. Who pays for this?
Not the OLG. The public pays.
By the way. One test missing was the addictive test.
The last line of the OLG half page ad states:
“Its not just a game to us.”
City of Toronto memo: Revenue sharing fairness of Woodbine Slots December 19, 2009 (.pdf)
Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corporation - wiki
1 reader comment - add yours See related articles: Canada, Gambling Watch Canada Network Newsletter, General 
Bill Clark9/12/2009: Ousted OLG CEO gives notice to government on plan to sue
Kelly McDougald served the government with notice on Thursday that she intends to launch a wrongful dismissal suit against the government.
This was the first time that the McGuinty government has fired the CEO of one of its agencies with cause since taking power six years ago. Globe & Mail
Update: McDougald is looking for a windfall of 9 million dollars for severe and unjustified the actions of the government. This case will drag on for years. She was appointed to clean up the OLG, acknowledges some of the expenses of the agency under her watch were ‘indeed inappropriate’.
Administrator9/1/2009: No happy dance at OLG
The entire board of the Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corp. (OLG) resigned Monday. They were replaced temporarily by provincial civil servants. Their first act involved the firing of Kelly McDougald, the agency’s CEO.
“I am disappointed with what has been brought to my attention,” Finance Minister Dwight Duncan told a news conference on Monday. “The expenses are a symptom of a much larger problem.”
McDougald was “dismissed with cause,” Duncan said and therefore will not receive a severance package. Former board chair Michael Gough said he wasn’t asked to quit, but did offer his resignation last Thursday.
The Liberals publicly released two years worth of expenses that were filed by OLG board members. They include:
- gym memberships worth $250
- Weight Watchers memberships
- club link golf fees
- a $1,500 bar tab at a $3,700 dinner for 38 people
- a $500 nanny fee so that a vice-president member could attend meetings, an amount since repaid
The OLG acknowledged Monday that the spending was unacceptable for a public agency. CTV
8/29/2009: Ontario government and the OLG
The Ontario Liberals are expecting opposition attacks when the legislature resumes the fall session and are attempting a clean up of the provincial gambling arm of the Ontario government.
According to The Toronto Star, CEO Kelly McDougald, who was hired two years ago to clean up, may be one of the people on their way out the door. In spite of her mandate, the OLG continues to be prone to poor behavior such as:
A Good Samaritan treated shabbily when he tried to turn in a cache of lost tickets;
A malfunctioning slot machine erroneously informing a player he’d won $42.9 million when the maximum payout was $9,025;
A misprinted scratch-and-win ticket that led a man to believe he had won $135,000 when he hadn’t.
But the straw that broke the camel’s back appears to be Liberal fears of a reprise of the eHealth Ontario debacle at OLG.
The Tories, repeating their successful strategy that exposed spending run amok at the electronic health records agency, are seeking thousands of pages in OLG documents under freedom of information legislation.
Records sought include expense accounts of senior executives, spending on leased, owned and rented venues, such as luxury boxes at sports stadiums, contracts for consultants as well as travel costs.
So far, the Tories have been stonewalled in their request for information as the Liberals try to beat them to the punch by taking pre-emptive action.
“The concern is she’s been running OLG like it’s a private-sector company when it’s a government agency,” said one Liberal insider.
McDougald was not in her office yesterday afternoon and did not return emails and calls from the Star.
She was put in the top job after previous troubles at the Crown agency, where it was found that lottery retailers, employees and their families won $198 million in prizes over 13 years, dating from 1996.
“Any CEO that’s running a large organization under public scrutiny certainly feels under the gun,” McDougald, a former Bell Canada and Nortel executive, told the Star in March.
OLG officials were also unavailable for comment yesterday.
7/29/2009: Casino State: Legalized Gambling in Canada
”
Investigating the tensions that arise from the relationships between gambling and morality, risk, social policy, crime, and youth problem gambling, these essays draw upon a range of disciplines to consider the economic benefits and social costs of legalized gambling. A contemporary study that raises important questions about state conduct, precarious policy issues, public health, and addictions, Casino State provides a necessary and comprehensive overview of the central issuesrelated to the legalization and expansion of gambling in Canada.”
Sociologically Speaking: Trent University Newsletter (.pdf)
Casino State: Legalized Gambling in Canada
University of Toronto Press 2009
James F. Cosgrove and Thomas R. Klassen
Google book reader - a look inside
5/5/2009: Dear Paul Pellizzari and the OLG - it’s more than passing strange
OLG Response to Gambling Watch Global
Re: “open letter” to OLG
Your letter of April 2, 2009 raises a number of concerns about problem gambling. I welcome the opportunity to respond to each issue you raise, and describe how OLG continuously seeks to expand its action plan to mitigate harm and risk associated with problem gambling. - Paul Pellizzari
“It is well documented that 40% of OLG gambling income comes from losses of 5% of gamblers and that just 20% of Ontarians provide 80% of the losses which the OLG call profit.” - Bill Clark
That information I gave above comes from a University of Lethbridge study released in June 2004: The Demographic Sources of Ontario Gaming Revenue. (Prepared for The Ontario Problem Gambling Research Centre) The cost of this study was approximately 200 thousand dollars.
• We are aware of the study, authored by Williams and Wood 2004, which found that “about 35% of Ontario gaming revenue is derived from moderate and severe problem gamblers.”
The researchers qualify this finding as “tentative” because the sample size was small (i.e. 32 individuals), and therefore not representative of the general population. If you are aware of other studies, we would be interested in learning of these. -Paul Pellizzari
On November 17 1997, Time magazine published a simple graph in an article titled: Where Gambling Dollars Come From. Gambling profits depend on the losses of gambling addicts.
In terms of other studies may I direct your attention to letters written to the OLGC in your own files, prior to your Picov input study. And the 1999 Wynne study: Problem Gambling Public Awareness Campaigns in North America.
It seems to those of us, Ontarians concerned for the public health of our fellow citizens, that it is more than passing strange that even government agencies involved in gambling seem generally unaware of the existence of this report. Should we therefore be surprised that most of our “public” appears to be totally unaware of the dangers that gambling poses to an unaware and uninformed populace?
The OLGC’s attention was drawn to Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons May 2001. This issue was devoted to social and economic analysis of gambling. In this volume there is an article by two Canadian economists as well as other recognized professionals.
Canada has yet to produce a cost/benefit study, but other countries whose governments are not direct connected to promoting gambling revenue are more critical. Cost/benefit studies have been done in Australia, New Zealand, UK and the US.
What about the US National Gambling Impact Study (June 1999) where a great deal of sworn testimony was given to US Congress and data came directly from the American Gambling Association.
As a retired pharmacist, I am aware of drug companies which write their own product monographs without peer review. These product monographs are not acceptable for the AMA (American Medical Association), CMA (Canadian Medical Association), CAMH (Canadian Association of Mental Health), or Lancet.
The amount spent by the four Ontario casinos for marketing & promotion is reported to be greater than 500,000,000 dollars per year. This amount is over and above money allocated for regular OLG advertising (Toronto Star). When the OLG confirms that a 100 plus thousand dollars is spent marketing to one addict alone, (Hamilton Spectator) this expenditure goes beyond enticement and beyond basic decency.
• OLG relies on research from credible sources and seeks guidance through formal relationships with expert groups – including CAMH, Ontario Problem Gambling Research Centre, and the Responsible Gambling Council – on how best to apply the best available data to the development of RG policies and programs. - Paul Pellizzari
I have addressed that above. These are sources used by promoters, and all are paid for by gambling money. Balanced harm and cost reports are not included. I would suggest peer review. Can you tell me if any of these studies are reviewed by anyone other than promoters?
“$2 billion of advertising and promotion by the OLG in the last 10 years.”
• OLG advertising complies with provincial regulations under the Gaming Control Act. We have also gone further by developing strict internal ad and marketing guidelines.
• As part of the entertainment business, we advertise and promote our products. A large part of our marketing budget is spent by resort casinos competing for business with gaming facilities across the Canada-US border. - Paul Pellizzari
This amount is reported to be greater than 500,000,000 dollars per year and is over and above regular OLG advertising. See Andrew Chung, The Toronto Star; Who Should Pay (2004) and Casinos not taking chances in court (2009).
• All individuals who register for self-exclusion cease to receive distributions of all gaming advertising, promotions and complementaries. - Paul Pellizzari
Point #1. The OLG made the rules.
Point #3. Individuals may well cease to receive direct mailings and promotions, but are still subject to all the daily output of OLG advertising placed in newspapers, on TV, and all other visual stimuli. To a half million addicted people, this continuous input to the addictive mind is harmful.
The background article to CBC’s Playing the Machines looks at the fact that suicide related deaths are not nationally tracked and the Ontario gambling suicides are increasing. (Dave Seglins, Ontario gambling-linked suicides rise.)
The background article to CTV W5’s Winners and Losers looks at the failure in enforcement of the self-exclusion policy.
The OLG continues in denial. Take a look at the comments under the CBC article, or at any recent article on self-exclusion which permits comments. The public is waking up to lack of care.
There was a blanket denial from the OLG that lottery sales vendors could cheat winners at the distribution level for years. There is now a new self verification ticket machine in Ontario.
Perhaps Bob Edmonds didn’t die in vain. In his case the legal fees to fight him in court were greater than the prize he claimed. As the Canadian public well knows, the OLG apology to Edmonds did not arrive in his lifetime.
Now a new pollutant enters the public sphere.
I must congratulate OLG for turning a harmful criticism around (the Edmonds case) and into an wow marketing tool, a by-product of lotto ticket savvy and education. I’m talking about that stupid catchy funky voice that confirms every lottery ticket stuck in to a scanner, plays that lotto tune and announces “winner/ gagnant” . One finds one’s-self looking at the player the tune is directed at and wondering what the great prize may be.
It is hard to find a business where OLG does not pursue us. This is a new level of intrusion.
• OLG has also launched a major myth-busting campaign and launched educational tools such as the website KnowYourLimit.ca, and a video co-developed with the Ontario Problem Gambling Research Centre.
“$39M dollars spent this year on prevention and research…isn’t a lot” - Paul Pellizzari
Relative to the annual sum of player losses per year - approximately 1 cent per dollar is spent by the OLG for prevention and research. Most of this prevention money goes in new, unnecessary and yet more industry favourable and repetitive in-house research. 39 million dollars yearly for research and prevention out of the annual 6 billion OLG intake is not very much.
• Ontario’s problem gambling strategy is one of the best funded programs in North America, and likely the world. In 2009-10 this funding will increase to $40 million. Since fiscal year 1999-2000, approximately $322 million has been allocated to the Province, which includes an estimated $40 million allocation for Fiscal 2009-10.
• The amount allocated to the strategy is set by policy of the government of Ontario. The Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care and the Ministry of Health Promotion distribute these funds to independent researchers, addictions counselors and outreach experts. - Paul Pellizzari
It would be interesting to see the amount spent on treatment over the years compared to continual repeated research. Most of the people I speak to go to Gamblers Anonymous for treatment and find it hard. They are reluctant to talk and ashamed of themselves.
This repeated research remains self defeating because research already done is not being applied. We have read articles of Public Health employees who have been muted, or muzzled about speaking out on gambling problems. Nowhere do we hear people should cease gambling, we hear about responsible gambling.
Funding policies also mute public debate on social costs of gambling says critics (.pdf) Sue Bailey and Louise Elliott Canadian Press February 27, 2003, is an interesting article with good background.
Have you read Dr. Peter McKenna (Terminal Damage) or a recent editorial in the Thunder Bay Chronicle talk about the impossibility of getting anyone to talk about gambling damage publicly?
I agree that Ontario has a well funded program comparative to the rest of North America. The question remains. How effective is that programs voice against a billion promotion dollars?
“OLG winner’s cards over the years have been used exclusively to reward addiction” - Bill Clark
The difficulty is that so much money is dependant on so few people, that one has to be very careful. Fully one third of OLG money comes from 5% of gamblers. Is the responsible gambling program promoted because OLG cannot afford to lose that segment of addicted support ?
A 2001 Picov study seemed to indicate that only 36% of Ontarians used OLG facilities and yes, it also mentions suicides.
• Player’s cards are optional. - Paul Pellizzari
However, the addicted mind cannot make a correct choice.
The addict wants his share of player rewards credited to his account.
He or she is going to plug in his card and connect just like pictures show - happy smiling addicts, all connected to the slots.
What about making player cards compulsory? Every one must use them. Have a policy such as Holland does; at first signs of self abuse, the player card privilege is cancelled.
That means no playing anywhere in Ontario.
OLG winner cards follow players in order to reward loss.
Holland analyses the same player information and determines rate of loss, but sets a point where gambling employees recognize reckless and addictive playing. The player is then flagged and is called into a casino office. There they are questioned on their ability to lose the amount they are playing and this is done to prevent active self abuse and criminal acts.
In Ontario OLG patrons do not have to sign up nor do they have to use the cards if they have one.
• When people indicate that they want to self-exclude to take a break from gambling their loyalty cards are rendered inactive. - Paul Pellizzari
That may be so, but by this time the harm is done, and if they must gamble, and they must, they are still admitted and OLG continues to cash in.
Rather than waiting until it is too late for the player, let the OLG take the initiative.
Program OLG computers to recognize addictive behaviors and assess the individual before it is too late. Look at behaviour and compare rates of loss to annual income averages. The OLG is perfectly equipped to cross reference information such as Switzerland does. (See the letter to former Ontario Health Minister George Smitherman from Dr. Paul Garfinkel, November 2004).
In April this year, 3 female players who reported having lost hundreds of thousands of dollars were recognized and rewarded for their addiction by the OLG.
A Quebec addict admitted he had a problem and went beyond signing a self-exclusion contract. He contacted the local casino by letter and phone asking the contract be honoured. I realize this occurred is Quebec, however his story demonstrates a point.
When I enquired of an OLG lottery agent about over selling tickets to an addict, she advised me in no uncertain terms that she was there to sell tickets.
When OLG and a self aware addict sign a self exclusion contact there is no stronger plea for help from an addict.
This act of self admission is not supported by the OLG. The OLG has defaulted on it’s contractual obligations.
“No drug has a higher suicide record than pathological gambling.”- Bill Clark
• We are not aware of any study that ranks the type of addiction as a determinant of suicide. Nevertheless, any death linked to gambling is of concern. For this reason, OLG has put in place various initiatives to help refer people to the professional guidance they need (see details below). - Paul Pellizzari
I find the above OLG statement very hard to accept. It has been awhile that I left pharmacy and I do not recall any drug with the continuous mention of suicide that is associated with pathological gambling. VLTs linked to “crack cocaine” VLTs and slots are interchanageable.
Before you have suicidal ideas call this number
Quebec slots come with warnings “avant les idees suicidaires”
The Canada Safety Council has written the Prime Minister, premiers and provincial coroners about gambling suicide.
Nearly all peer reviewed studies link this complex and tragic side effect. Suicide is a side effect. Children of gamblers are far more like to commit suicide. See Canadian Roulette at the Canada Safety Council website.
All this makes me want to ask; where have you been?
Where are you now? Are you going anywhere with all this?
I would invite you to read Manitoba Gambling and Problem Gambling 2006. (.pdf) There is a section on suicide.
I also invite you to look at studies about Las Vegas and Atlantic City and their contracts with addicts, or Quebec coroner reports.
Regarding the use of the term, “gaming”, I appreciate that it may be a word more commonly used within the industry, OLG is less focused on such semantics and is working to continuously improve its role in the task at hand - which is to reduce harm associated with problem gambling.
In addition to addressing your specific issues, I’d like to provide an overview of our multi-pronged responsible gambling program:
• Prevention and Support through the creation of 24 on-site Responsible Gaming Resource Centers so far, run by renowned prevention experts, the Responsible Gambling Council. All gaming sites will have these centres by next year.
• The RGRCs serve as a bridge for referrals to professional help and community care
• Specialized training for all OLG staff, in particular our 6,000+ gaming employees using a curriculum designed by national addiction experts from CAMH.
• Contribution and support for research in problem gambling.
• Targeted education for players and the public about the realities of gambling through myth-busting and other materials, supported by the Know Your Limit campaign and website.
• Surveillance employees in all gaming facilities work with floor staff and security on all OLG Responsible Gaming programs.
• OLG slot machines issue a system alert to flag a self-excluded person who attempts to use a loyalty card for slot play.
• Pilot testing new technology in facial recognition designed for detection of self-excluded individuals. - Paul Pellizzari
How can anyone believe you (OLG) have any interest in citizens and their humanity until you stop aggressive saturation Pavlovian marketing?
If you want to train a laboratory rat to push a button, don’t reward him with a food pellet after every push - vary the number of pushes required for the payoff. Give him a pellet after 4 pushes one time, 16 the next, then 3, then 23.
By manipulating the length between payoffs researchers can led a rat, pigeon or human into addictive behaviors.
They could stretch the ratio to the point where the rat would literally drop over from exhaustion (Burt Constable, Pigeon, Rat or Human, Gambling Is Addictive. Daily Herald May 6, 2000)
How can the OLG be believed when your contractual obligations regarding self exclusion contracts are not enforced? It is known there are nearly 1/2 million problem gamblers in Ontario and that about 12 thousand have self-exclusion contracts. You acknowledged this in The Globe and Mail’s recent piece, The Big Bluff.
What is the point of these contracts if they aren’t enforced?
Again, thank you for your interest in our responsible gambling programs. For more information, please see KnowYourLimit.ca. - Paul Pellizzari
No addict knows their limit, no addict respects their limit, and no addict chooses to be an addict.
Is the OLG responsibly respecting self-exclusion contracts instead of blaming people who admit they need help?
There has to be better awareness by the OLG that gambling is addictive.
Finally.
After 10 years of advocacy we have a remark and response from OLG.
Thank you for commenting.
No reader comments yet - add yours See related articles: Activism, Canada, Wisdom and its absence
Bill Clark4/2/2009: Ombudsman: recommend banning retailers - OLG clean up your act
Ontario’s Ombudsman says he’ll recommend the legislature ban retailers from playing the lottery if the Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corporation can’t clean up widespread fraud.
Andre Marin, whose 2007 report found a disproportionate number of retailers winning the lottery, said he has resisted calling for a ban in order to give retailers “an opportunity to be honest and give the OLG a chance to police them.
“But if there is going to be a whole industry to police, we should just ban them. It’s such a headache. They are a wily lot.”
