Rishi Sunak - Prime Minister
Discussion
b
hstewie said:
hstewie said:Elysium said:
You have made quite a big deal about the Tory betting scandal, but immediately went down the ‘isolated incident’ route with this one.
That’s the danger when you are obviously partisan and are looking for stories that reaffirm your views rather than inform them.
What I said was "Eddie I think you'd have to admit that right now it's an isolated event v event number 4271 or whatever we're up to by now.".That’s the danger when you are obviously partisan and are looking for stories that reaffirm your views rather than inform them.
That isn't being partisan it's stating facts.
It’s a stupid thing to do and he’s been suspended, rightly in my view, but there’s a very obvious difference between his behaviour and that of Tory MP’s who were in the know about the election date. Those claiming double standards are guilty of just that, or else they’re dim.
Blue62 said:
bhstewie said:
hstewie said:Elysium said:
You have made quite a big deal about the Tory betting scandal, but immediately went down the ‘isolated incident’ route with this one.
That’s the danger when you are obviously partisan and are looking for stories that reaffirm your views rather than inform them.
What I said was "Eddie I think you'd have to admit that right now it's an isolated event v event number 4271 or whatever we're up to by now.".That’s the danger when you are obviously partisan and are looking for stories that reaffirm your views rather than inform them.
That isn't being partisan it's stating facts.
It’s a stupid thing to do and he’s been suspended, rightly in my view, but there’s a very obvious difference between his behaviour and that of Tory MP’s who were in the know about the election date. Those claiming double standards are guilty of just that, or else they’re dim.
Blue62 said:
The point that seems to have eluded some is that this betting scandal is about inside information, the Labour candidate in question did no such thing. Betting against oneself implies that either he was going to throw it, which in his case seems implausible, or he was looking to cushion the effect had he lost, football supporters often bet against their teams for the same reason.
It’s a stupid thing to do and he’s been suspended, rightly in my view, but there’s a very obvious difference between his behaviour and that of Tory MP’s who were in the know about the election date. Those claiming double standards are guilty of just that, or else they’re dim.
If he has access to non-public information like private polling or knowledge of where Labour are sending their canvassers and resources then the Labour case is also insider trading. It’s a stupid thing to do and he’s been suspended, rightly in my view, but there’s a very obvious difference between his behaviour and that of Tory MP’s who were in the know about the election date. Those claiming double standards are guilty of just that, or else they’re dim.
Mr Penguin said:
If he has access to non-public information like private polling or knowledge of where Labour are sending their canvassers and resources then the Labour case is also insider trading.
I wouldn't bother. It's just like betting a few quid on your favourite football team.....no differences at all....Elysium said:
Yes, there are obvious differences. The Labour MPs actions are far worse. Betting against yourself is much more likely to be a criminal offence.
Out of interest - because I’m not close to the law on gambling (once interviewed for the GC role at one of the large betting companies but didn’t get the job, so never learned about gambling law) - which law(s) might be have broken for this to be a criminal offence? Mr Penguin said:
If he has access to non-public information like private polling or knowledge of where Labour are sending their canvassers and resources then the Labour case is also insider trading.
It really isn’t. He’s not an MP he’s a candidate.
He has zero chance of winning the seat, he doesn’t need any special inside information to confirm it, if you think he was planning to throw it I will happily send you a window to lick.
He didn’t place a bet on the date of the election based on privileged, inside information.
He’s been suspended.
If it’s a criminal act let’s see what happens next - nothing is my bet, but I’ve gone each way just in case.
He’s done a silly thing and has been punished.
Pick the equivalence out of that.
Blue62 said:
....
He has zero chance of winning the seat, he doesn’t need any special inside information to confirm it, if you think he was planning to throw it I will happily send you a window to lick.
...
You should really check your facts. The betting odds on that seat prior to his suspension suggests it was all to play for.He has zero chance of winning the seat, he doesn’t need any special inside information to confirm it, if you think he was planning to throw it I will happily send you a window to lick.
...
Blue62 said:
He’s not an MP he’s a candidate.
Candidates still have access to private information that gives them an advantage over someone without it, even if he hasn't been voted in before - I can't see what knowledge being an incumbent MP would give over being a challenger (technically, nobody is an MP as parliament has been dissolved).Blue62 said:
He didn’t place a bet on the date of the election based on privileged, inside information.
No, he placed a bet on the result of an election (possibly) based on privileged, inside information.Blue62 said:
He’s been suspended.
Which would suggest Labour think he has done something wrong (as do the Gambling Commission).EddieSteadyGo said:
You should really check your facts. The betting odds on that seat prior to his suspension suggests it was all to play for.
No check yours, despite the appalling Conservative campaign this safe Tory seat is still enjoying a significant lead for the Conservatives and is a heavily predicted hold. Try harder to convince yourself and anyone else that this is in any way equivalent, it really isn’t. But on you go, desperate to defend the indefensible. I’m not in a tribe, just hate sleaze and greed and know when I see it.
Elysium said:
Yes, there are obvious differences. The Labour MPs actions are far worse. Betting against yourself is much more likely to be a criminal offence.
How do you figure? Betting on a thing you know privileged information about is a fix. At best twit aspiring Labour MP has sight of private polling data, which is an statistical exercise with error bands, at the last check the constituency he's standing in is a coin toss so arguing he's on a sure thing either way is dubious, although now he's suspended he may paradoxically win his bet.Edited by hidetheelephants on Tuesday 25th June 23:42
pingu393 said:
What do you think he would rather?....
£90k pa for 5 years or a few hundred quid in compensation for six weeks of campaigning?
He is reportedly already a millionaire. One of Labour's largest donors over a long period of time. He isn't / wasn't short of money. Probably just like the MPs (and to a lesser extent, the police officers) betting on the date of the election.£90k pa for 5 years or a few hundred quid in compensation for six weeks of campaigning?
Blue62 said:
No check yours, despite the appalling Conservative campaign this safe Tory seat is still enjoying a significant lead for the Conservatives and is a heavily predicted hold. Try harder to convince yourself and anyone else that this is in any way equivalent, it really isn’t.
But on you go, desperate to defend the indefensible. I’m not in a tribe, just hate sleaze and greed and know when I see it.
Please show your link to support your assertion. You claimed "he has zero chance of winning the seat".... But on you go, desperate to defend the indefensible. I’m not in a tribe, just hate sleaze and greed and know when I see it.
OMITN said:
Elysium said:
Yes, there are obvious differences. The Labour MPs actions are far worse. Betting against yourself is much more likely to be a criminal offence.
Out of interest - because I’m not close to the law on gambling (once interviewed for the GC role at one of the large betting companies but didn’t get the job, so never learned about gambling law) - which law(s) might be have broken for this to be a criminal offence? https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2005/19/secti...
The Labour candidate must have deceived the bookmaker he bet with by withholding the fact that he was the subject of the bet. That seems to be obviously contrary to 3(b) with the existence of the bet being proof of the deception.
In contrast the two conservatives being investigated (there are only 2) are presumably suspected of having inside information. For this to be an offence the possession of that information would need to be proven.
I think the Labour situation is much worse, particularly as it implies the possibility of election offences as well.
Edited by Elysium on Tuesday 25th June 23:43
EddieSteadyGo said:
Ok. Here you go. Most of the betting odds have now been removed since his suspension but Bet365 still shows the original odds of him winning at 5/4. Far from "zero chance"....
Those are the odds now but just after the story broke it was even closer - 11/10 for Labour and 4/6 for the Conservatives.Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff