Legal /moral issues aside, from a practical point of view Sunak should just have sacked them straight away, rather than be seen to dither then have to sack them later anyway
Given the probable time for the investigation I doubt he will be the one sacking them.
I wonder if this is why Sunak hasnt sacked them yet?
https://twitter.com/SaulStaniforth/status/1804027673586409528
Because when it emerges Shapps' fool proof plan of laying several bets under his many aliases has been rumbled, he will have to sack a cabinet member too & if they can keep a lid on this for 2 weeks (a big ask) , whereas after the GE if they even have a seat Im not sure any will care.
-Although recall petition and by-election just after the GE would be hilarious, Sunak wont be leader
Rather perversely, I’m hoping Rishi successfully defends his seat and therefore can’t simply walk away on 5th July.
He can still quit and do the "I'm stepping down as an MP to avoid being a distraction" line.
What I dint get is that Craig Williams has admitted to it
Yet Sunak says he wants to wait for the results of the investigation
I think Williams has admitted the bet and said it was a bad idea. Sunak presumably would want to say he wants to hear whether there will be any charges etc
I think Williams has admitted the bet and said it was a bad idea. Sunak presumably would want to say he wants to hear whether there will be any charges etc
Thats Johnson levels of mismanaging a crisis
Ill bet 😉 that there will be more revelations in the Sunday papers & Sunak will look even weaker
Sunak wont deny a cabinet member placed a bet...
https://twitter.com/AdamBienkov/status/1804111558676512792
and gambling commission have confirmed they are looking at criminal offences
sorry grimep!
Currently the commission is investigating the possibility of offences concerning the date of the election. This is an ongoing investigation, and the commission cannot provide any further details at this time.
If someone uses confidential information in order to gain an unfair advantage when betting, this may constitute an offence of cheating under Section 42 of the Gambling Act, which is a criminal offence.
I know nothing about this subject, so can someone explain what's the justification behind Section 42 of the Gambling Act? It's perfectly fine when the public are losing money when the odds aren't in their favour, but it's illegal and immoral when punters finally manage to gain an advantage?
I presume lobbying by gambling companies brought in this law?
It's the same principle as insider share dealing. The market (stock exchange or gaming) works on the basis of open transparent information, coupled with a chance element for likelihood of reward. Without that open information the market cannot function freely. That bookmakers make profits is a reflection of the skill they have in setting odds. Doing additional research is valid (witness the hole in one betting win a few years ago - the bookmakers were privy to the same information had they looked), but knowing something by nature of privileged position is not;
You have insider information from your partner who works for Company X that it is about to buy Company Y, and the premium is 90%, so buy shares in Y and double your investment! Needless to say the share sales data is tested to see how many people bought shares in Y in the lead up to the announcement, just as the FT published the spike in money laid against a July 4th election date. People are not subtle. In fact they tend to be stupid.
A better solution to this stupidity is simply not to trade based on the PERCEPTION of how it were to look. I don't gamble and I don't trade shares (especially not in biopharma). I'm subject to strict rules and policies, but have my own internal compass that is stricter still.
I used to do contract work for a large betting organization... The amount of customer profiling they do is eye opening... Bookies are not in the businesses of losing money.
Such a specific bet by several people will absolutely set alarm bells ringing just from the algorithms alone... Then when a human at the betting company looks at the bet, and who is making the bets, and realized they are all tories betting about a tory controlled event... Well the rest is in the newspapers!
Fruitless like the FCA and incompetent though as it's in the public limelight , maybe just maybe some charges will be brought upon him.
what’s the justification behind Section 42 of the Gambling Act? It’s perfectly fine when the public are losing money when the odds aren’t in their favour, but it’s illegal and immoral when punters finally manage to gain an advantage?
It applies to gambling operators too. It's not about the odds being bad or good, it's about the bet being unfair. You play roulette, you accept the odds being offered. You play roulette but the wheel has been altered to make the ball land on 0 more often, and you're being cheated.
