A couple of weeks ago, whilst I was blogging high up in the French Alps, I made the stunningly un-prescient claim that gambling “isn’t really an issue for anyone in the upcoming General Election”.
I was casually referring to the wider industry, and regulation thereof, but that’s not what I said. Lo and behold we find ourselves days into a front page story about rigged election betting.
The delicious meta-lesson here (at least for a blog dedicated to the pitfalls of gambling) is that it is really hard for mere mortals to predict things. Um… unless you know when they’re going to happen.
To recap, a handful of people at Conservative Party HQ decided to bet on the date of the next general election. They are accused of having done so with the inside knowledge that a date had already been set.
The story broke with just a single person, Craig Williams, betting £100 at 5-1 on a July election. He did so just a few days before Rishi Sunak made the shock announcement.
Now, as a listener of the podcast The Rest is Politics, I know that the snap election caught a huge swathe of the Tory party off guard. Co-host Rory Stewart is still well connected to people affected, and it seems hardly anyone knew it was going to happen – including very senior figures.
Luckily, our boy Craig is the Prime Minister’s Parliamentary Private Secretary. When it comes to inner circles, he is in the innermost. If this were archery, then he’d be in the yellow bit which we pretend is gold.
With each passing day, another name has emerged of someone making a similar bet. First a policeman who works within earshot of the inner circle. Then a parliamentary candidate in Bristol called Laura Sanders, who it quickly transpired is married to Tony Lee, the Director of Campaigning for the Tories.
The fifth and most recent person involved, is Nick Mason. He’s the party’s top guy for data and analytics.
As with any disastrously botched scandal cover-up, the information is slowly oozing through the cracks and the picture is becoming clearer. This process is happening with the help of the Gambling Commission, who have the ability to investigate who is betting on what. You know, in case stuff is getting rigged.
At this point, we know that the bets were made by these people, but there is uncertainty over whether they had inside knowledge. However, there has been a flurry of suspensions, leaves of absence and no comments. On the Spectrum of Justice, those things tend to skew towards the guilty side.
Of the five perpetrators, I have a measure of sympathy for the policeman. I find it hard to imagine many people finding the Grays Sports Almanac and not using that valuable information. But ultimately, if he has acted on privileged knowledge, then he’s done so illegally. That isn’t really acceptable for a law man.
For the other four, if they’re as guilty as they appear, then I wish nothing but fiery damnation. It shows an appalling lack of both judgement and integrity for prospective public servants. They should be removed from their positions and barred from any future involvement in politics.
Unfortunately, the current Conservative party isn’t big on ethics, hence they are trying to muddle through this and any punishment is likely to be minimal. I look forward to their impending downfall immensely.
There is one other baddie in all of this, and so far they seem to have escaped without electoral scrutiny, as a couple of weeks ago I predicted they would: the gambling industry.
People shouldn’t really be allowed to bet on events that can be pre-determined. A system that would let Vince McMahon bet on the winner of the Royal Rumble is ripe for abuse, and it is exactly what has facilitated this scandal.
In a perfect world, legislation would prohibit markets like this from being offered in the first place. But if they are going to exist then potential bets have to be heavily restricted.
The future leadership and direction of our country won’t be influenced by a cheeky fiver, but if close aides of the person in power stand to win hundreds or thousands of pounds over the date of the next election, then the entire course of history could be changed.
That is not an acceptable scenario.
NOTE: I made a couple of statistical edits to my recent post on the odds being offered by bookies for Euro 24. I am nothing if not fair and fallible.
Reluctant Gambler 