You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
While I lap up the carnage that this is raising in the Tory party I do have one question: how were they caught?
Do betting companies just forward a list of suspicious bets and the people making them to the police?
just shows the tories will do anything to make a quick buck.
Yup
/thread
There's some details and stats on the election thread
Data analysis brought up a suspicious uplift in quantity & value of bets placed the day before the election was announced 🤔
The bookies aren’t daft. As soon as they spot suspicious betting patterns, they’re straight on it
They particularly keep more of an eye on any bet that is susceptible to someone having had inside information, so a huge spike like this would have set alarm bells ringing straight away.
Youd have to be pretty bloody stupid to whack £850 quid on some random date and not expect that to flag up somewhere.
Great innit, the tories reminding the public what a real shower of shit they are whilst in full campaign mode.
Apparently the names revealed so far are just the tip of the iceberg and they were all at it.
https://Twitter.com/mrdaveturner/status/1803742185889685799?s=46&t=1lK7Dw1b6RqGJyvufO-trQ
Insider political betting doesn’t appear to be contrary to any law.
Hmm....
The UKGC has not confirmed whether it is investigating these specific cases, although it has issued guidance on rules for using confidential information to gain an advantage when betting.
“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,”
edit to add the link https://igamingbusiness.com/legal-compliance/ukgc-confirms-investigation-into-several-potential-election-betting-offences/
Cheating is against the law, by your own paste. The issue is whether having insider information on the date of the election, and then using that information to win a bet, is cheating. How does that sound to you?
You're not a very good troll, and an even worse lawyer.
Insider political betting doesn’t appear to be contrary to any law.
Naturally this story is being milked to the maximum by those sympathetic to the hammer & sickle brigade
Looks like the offence of cheating to me, from the legislation you posted
Even if it wasn’t breaking any laws, (which it is) it says a lot that they can’t even call an election without being on the take.
I need help; which should I show more outrage over, this or stonehenge painted orange?
One of them's even admitted it. OK, has said 'it was a huge error of judgement' and refused to say whether they had any prior knowledge. There is no reasonable situation in which you would refuse to answer that in the event you didn't.
On Newsnight just now - Tory fodder can't say whether it was wrong because they don't have a gambling account so don't know how it works.
@sirromj - You could do both simultaneously and become a simmering mass of barely constrained anger
multitasking, innit?
More a general lack of surprise than outrage. It’s nice they’re being found out, shame it wasn’t Brick Tops Bookies.
The boilermakers and thatchers union?
I didn't think that Thatcher liked unions.
Nobody is better at quickly identifying unusual trends and patterns than the gambling industry.
It just shows the level of greed and contempt they have, even for small amounts of money. Craig Williams is reported to have placed £100 at 5:1 odds. So he stands to gain £500. Is it really worth the risk over £500?
You’re not a very good troll, and an even worse lawyer.
TBF the number of successful prosecutions does seem to be basically zero. Which is probably why the only arrest so far has been the cop under a different law.
Sadly I reckon they would stand a good chance of getting away with it even if morally it is wrong (ok given how immoral the gambling firms I am somewhat flexible about them being screwed over in return but I am not a fan of the enemy of my enemy is my friend so screw them both). After all they aint actually gambling are they?
Data analysis brought up a suspicious uplift in quantity & value of bets placed the day before the election was announced
This doesnt seem to have been caught though. One bookies does seem to have cross referenced the politically exposed people against the betting on the election and after finding a match and doing a quick google to find out they were not only a tory but closely linked to Sunak went hmmmmm.
All of the others came out of the gambling commission also going hmmm and asking the bookies to send them a list of all people who made a "bet" on the july election within a specific time range. They then sent it to the tories and, I assume, the met and asked "anyone you know?"
Insider political betting doesn’t appear to be contrary to any law
Misconduct in a public office, as per the arrest of the police officer? .MPs are public servants for this law.
More a general lack of surprise than outrage.
Yeah I think that's it. Numb.
TBF the number of successful prosecutions does seem to be basically zero.
is not the same as
Insider political betting doesn’t appear to be contrary to any law.
It's pretty clearly contrary to the law, whether or not it is actually prosecuted (for whatever reason)
You’re not a very good troll, and an even worse lawyer
I imagine Trump is thinking “who is that guy?…….we need him”
I don't understand why it is treated as misconduct in a public office when it is a police officer but just a bit naughty when it is a Member of Parliament? The first guy was the Prime Minister's parliamentary secretary?
If this is true and a cabinet member placed a bet....
All bets are off
https://twitter.com/Eyeswideopen69/status/1803860950908572170?t=oTcDuZ3nq6YWkIit0ruhUA&s=19
In reality these cheating scum are more likely to have been milking more dodgy £££ out of the expenses scheme every week for the past 14 years, than they would make from the bet.
But it just illustrates how much they are just in it for themselves and untrustworthy they are. I'd really not trust them to even empty the bags of dogs eggs out of the wheelie bin every fortnight.
I need help; which should I show more outrage over, this or stonehenge painted orange?
Almost certainly this. But I'm sure some old Tory duffer will bring up Rayner's house again soon, there's no equivalence quite like false equivalence eh.
I do wonder, if it were possible, would Lil' Rishi bump the election forward by another week, just so this whole thing could be over that bit sooner and he could piss off back to California where he was happier.
I almost feel sorry for him sometimes, but then I remember that they're a bunch of grasping, vernal snakes, and he's their mascot and my pity evaporates...
I don’t understand why it is treated as misconduct in a public office when it is a police officer but just a bit naughty when it is a Member of Parliament? The first guy was the Prime Minister’s parliamentary secretary?
I think there is a distinction. That doesn’t mean the cop hasn’t broken the gambling regs, or that the MP may not have committed misconduct in public office but I think the cop is charged with Misconduct in Public Office because as a close protection officer he inevitably had access to / awareness of / insight into what was happening at the top of government. There is a very strong expectation that whatever knowledge he gains that way is strictly confidential. If he’d sold it to the papers, posted it on Twitter etc it would still be misconduct in public office - whereas if the PM’s PPS had leaked it - he’d probably not be guilty of misconduct.
it is important for ministers to be able to trust their CPOs to have the utmost discretion, and undermining that risks ministers operating away from their CPOs and therefore puts them in danger. Equally if CPOs are acknowledged to see/remember “things” then perhaps they could be witnesses at inquiries… and that could be awkward.
I do wonder, if it were possible, would Lil’ Rishi bump the election forward by another week, just so this whole thing could be over that bit sooner and he could piss off back to California where he was happier.
I have another theory… the 1922 committee were threatening that there were nearly 50 letters, he knew that no matter what happened they would lose, so he decided to take the pricks down with him. In benevolent moments I actually wonder if it’s a massive act of patriotism - has he realised that the tories aren’t fit to govern and taken it on himself to make sure they don’t!
there’s even a bit of me who has wondered if he’s said (jokingly of course 😉 to the CPO - if I were you I’d go down to Ladbrokes and stick a days wages on 4th July!
What I find interesting is that the 'tell' for the gambling industry wasn't that sum huge but stunningly accurate bet was placed, but that a lot of modest but accurate bets were placed all at the same time.
That means that either it was a coordinated effort of some sort - that the handfui of people who were in the know about the election (which lets face it, wasn't the Tory party more broadly or even most of the cabinet) discussed the idea of putting a bet on - and did so.
Or it means that a surprisingly large proportion of the people who had that inside information came to the conclusion independently that they should put a bet on.
If they discussed and coordinated it - they're all idiots as the results of the actions are there for us all to see. If they didn't, it's just happenstance that they all took the same action then that just means they're all idiots. And the results of the actions are there for us all to see because they're too stupid to realise that the idiots around them would do the same thing.
Allegedly...
Excl: Here's what happens if you scrape Betfair data for bets on a July election.<br><br>This graph cuts off at the end of 21 May, the day before Sunak announced the election.<br><br>There's a flood of bets that day - before Rishi formally told the cabinet and stood in Downing Street. pic.twitter.com/AfKyzAbDBQ
— Jim Waterson (@jimwaterson) June 20, 2024
Insider political betting doesn’t appear to be contrary to any law.
Naturally this story is being milked to the maximum by those sympathetic to the hammer & sickle brigade
And you're what, a touch the forelock kinda guy to the man in the Big House...
If you admire someone cheating then can we guess you voted for Johnson in 2019?
The answer to the OP is Bookies aren't stupid, they know their business.
Craig Williams is reported to have placed £100 at 5:1 odds. So he stands to gain £500. Is it really worth the risk over £500?
This is the really stupid/funny thing. If it was in the US it would be someone betting 5 or 6 figures, but British politicians are so cheap that they'll do something like this for a few hundred quid. Like Matt Hancock giving away COVID PPE contracts to his pub landlord in return for a few packs of pork scratchings. Or when he awarded a £37bn testing contract in return for sounding like a £1500 jockey club membership. Or when Robert Jenrick overruled Tower Hamlets council to let Richard Desmond build a £1bn development and avoid a £40m community infrastructure charge for a mere £12k donation. In any sane country the person making it all go away would want at least a few million for their trouble, but we can't even do corruption well!
Malfeasance when: a public officer acting as such. wilfully neglects to perform their duty and/or wilfully misconducts themselves.
Placing a bet would seems cover it. Knowing of having inside info on dates and placing a bet would seem to be misconduct, which opens up Malfeasance in a public office charges.
Difference in treatment down to one being colleagues could help keep you in power and the other being staff that will be replaced by someone who deals with that stuff.
Rumours that a cabinet minister gets named today
I do wonder, if it were possible, would Lil’ Rishi bump the election forward by another week, just so this whole thing could be over that bit sooner and he could piss off back to California where he was happier.
Rather perversely, I'm hoping Rishi successfully defends his seat and therefore can't simply walk away on 5th July.
I think the cop is charged with Misconduct in Public Office because as a close protection officer he inevitably had access to / awareness of / insight into what was happening at the top of government. There is a very strong expectation that whatever knowledge he gains that way is strictly confidential. If he’d sold it to the papers, posted it on Twitter etc it would still be misconduct in public office – whereas if the PM’s PPS had leaked it – he’d probably not be guilty of misconduct.
Presumably because the mp would argue that the leaking doesn’t constitute wrong as it is an accepted part of political working. However both still have the confidentiality expectation and sticking a fiver on at Paddy Power is the same for both - just MP’s don’t believe in facing the justice system.
The Gambling Commission will lead an investigation and prosecution on cheating. The police will lead an investigation on Misconduct in public office. I wouldn’t assume that no charges so far = no charges will be brought.
It just shows the level of greed and contempt they have, even for small amounts of money. Craig Williams is reported to have placed £100 at 5:1 odds. So he stands to gain £500. Is it really worth the risk over £500?
I used to work in gambling in a job where I'd regularly be invited for days out in boxes with MPs etc. One time I even had to share a table with Andrew Bridgen *shudders*. The venn diagram of MPs and gamblers probably has quite a lot of cross over. Seems to be the nature of the beast.
Misconduct in a public office, as per the arrest of the police officer? .MPs are public servants for this law.
Craig Williams is an MP (well, was at the time of the bet being placed) but the Bristol candidate wasn't. I don't remember her day job but it's not clear that she holds public office.
I also agree that the cheating offence is not a slam dunk (even if the facts were proved). Analogies with other naughty behaviour like insider trading aren't really legally helpful even if they help us disapprove of their (admitted yet?) betting.
Everybody needs to calm down - there's a lot of time before this train arrives at the station and there's plenty of scope to change, add, drop charges.
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.
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
grimep Free Member
Insider political betting doesn’t appear to be contrary to any law.
Naturally this story is being milked to the maximum by those sympathetic to the hammer & sickle brigade
Since his sacking from GBeebies it's good to see that Dan Wootton is widening his spread on social media.
For a couple of the backbench MPs i think it will be quite hard to prove they knew definitively - as per the Newsnight reporter who stated the night before the announcement there was a lot of gossip that 4th July was going to be the date. However .....the Campaigns manager was almost certainly privy to that sort of information ahead of the rest of us and needs depositing into the sewer he came from.
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.
Kind of, kind of not. He said it was a huge error of judgement (to place a bet on the GE date) but has stopped short of saying that the error was because he knew when the date would be.
It could genuinely have been a lucky guess and he genuinely didn't know (even then as a Tory MP I'd query if being more privy to the mood music is enough to count as insider info) - and the error is to even have opened himself up to even a lucky guess allegation.
The fact he was subsequently asked whether he knew and answered that he wasn't commenting further though. That smells of guilty, but not admitting it in case it turns out it can't be proved. I've defended innocent until plenty of times, and will do so again here - but it don't look great, TBH.
If he is genuinely innocent, why not say 'I genuinely had no information, it was just a lucky punt, but in hindsight a stupid thing to do for exactly the reasons that have turned out and I'm deeply sorry'
[Oh, and BTW - whether legally guilty, guilty but impossible to prove, or innocent; the lack of judgement alone is enough stupidity that withdrawal of the whip should immediately be the sanction. There's plenty you can say or do that it is legally allowed, but which makes you unfit to be an MP]
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.