Conservative candidates/betting scandal have been sacked.

"hope we don’t see several policemen losing their jobs."

Why? If they're corrupt they deserve to lose their jobs. God knows there's enough corruption, misogyny, sexual assault and dodgy dealings in the force. Losing a few more can only be for the common good.

and yet another? (hard to tell)

www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/czkk0d19kgdo

it seems to me the ones for the most substantial concern are those who used insider information

I don’t think politicians or political aides should be allowed to make any bets on any political issues, but I agree betting on a dead cert based on insider information is reprehensible. As for the police involved, what idiots - somebody must have told them though?

I really was shocked about the police one, it does look as if they were acting on insider information because of security connections

news.sky.com/story/five-more-police-officers-alleged-to-have-placed-bets-on-general-election-timing-met-police-13158631

Well there can be degrees of corruption. IMO It would depend on how far these officers were from the origin of the information and the size of their bets.

winterwhite

Well we live in interesting times. I suppose voters would vote for them as independents in the hope that if they win they would be allowed to take the whip once the dust had settled.
What other solution could there be?

It’s easy to understand people on the periphery and ignorant of gambling law thinking it harmless fun to bet a tenner or two once they’d heard a rumour of a July election. I hope we don’t see several policemen losing their jobs.

Seriously 🤦🏼‍♀️ Your saying that a police officer who broke the law shouldn’t loose his job.
If your not saying that you must mean that they didn’t know 🤷‍♀️
As the police would say to you ignorance of the law is no excuse
What’s good for the goose is good for the gander.

winterwhite

Well there can be degrees of corruption. IMO It would depend on how far these officers were from the origin of the information and the size of their bets.

Where would you draw the line in what’s acceptable and what’s not.

Would the line be definite insider knowledge?

Yes, I believe insider knowledge is key. Sky News reports that the Labour guy isn’t in the same league as the Tory ones, for this reason.

The Labour candidate was downright stupid. He bet on himself losing in his constituency, which is a safe Tory seat. Unless it could be proved that he was going to fix his loss somehow, he’s just guilty of stupidity and lack of integrity. Still right that he should go!

The Tory people may have had insider knowledge of the date of the election, which raises things to a different level.

I think they should all be ashamed of themselves - whichever stripe.

And a Labour candidate has been caught out......betting against himself!?!?
I bet Sir Keir could throttle the fool, but he'll be stoic about it. At least outwardly.
Sir Ed Davey must be crossing his fingers that none of the Lib-Dem candidates will be nabbed by the Gambling Commission.

I'm trying to resist the thought that the betting scandal pretty much proves "they're all the same!", because I know deep down that that is a lazy generalisation, but........

More and more of them being exposed. I can't see why anyone would risk their reputation and future on the chance of winning a few hundred pounds. Hope they wouldn't get caught, I suppose.

According to BBC news night up to 15 Conservatives investigated in relationship to insider betting.

Yes the danger is "they're all the same, I won't bother to vote".

Wyllow3

According to BBC news night up to 15 Conservatives investigated in relationship to insider betting.

Yes the danger is "they're all the same, I won't bother to vote".

Of course what adds to the cynicism is the lack of urgency when these offences come to light. Whether Tory or Labour, a leader must take immediate steps to suspend and / or investigate - not wait to see how, and on who, the dust settles- giving time for the culprits to formulate their excuses and 'reasons', and the inevitable apology.

And the electorate do get bored with the procrastination because it dominates the headlines overshadowing matters that are of greater concern to it.

So in the end it becomes part of the "who cares" culture... "they're all at it anyway". It happened with Boris Johnson and the parties - in the end voters were suggesting that it didn't really matter because loads of people were partying, too.

That is the immorality of modern day government. If it makes rules for everyone to follow, it's got to abide by them too. And not cling on to oversee damage limitation and how long it can weather what will eventually be regarded by the public as a storm in a teacup which is what I suspect our leaders over the oast xx number of years, have done.

Can we not get back to the days when politicians messed up, owned up, and resigned to preserve the integrity of the party?. The moral bar code has been lowered and now the British public will accept law-breaking, cover-ups and lies.

If there's any decline in British values which some in government insist is now prevalent, they should look closer to home before making wild accusations about others.

I dont know why they cant just replace them with the 'next in line' in the said party.Yes it happened in Rossendale and the guy who had just lost out as the labour representative was not allowed to take his place but he IS now their rep for this election in july.

Dickens, the Labour Party acted very quickly suspending Kevin Craig when he was found to be betting on the result of his constituency ballot.

That’s right Nandalot, Keir Starmer got rid of the stupid Labour guy immediately.

Thank goodness for decisive leadership!

Alistair Jack made over £2000 betting on the election but has been barely mentioned. I don't see Sunak getting rid of him

Casdon

A Labour candidate has been sacked now - for betting against himself. How bizarre. How many more will come out of the woodwork I wonder.
news.sky.com/story/labour-candidate-suspended-as-gambling-commission-launches-investigation-13158716

But I assume that he wasn't insider trading? In which case why suspend him?

Dinahmo

Casdon

A Labour candidate has been sacked now - for betting against himself. How bizarre. How many more will come out of the woodwork I wonder.
news.sky.com/story/labour-candidate-suspended-as-gambling-commission-launches-investigation-13158716

But I assume that he wasn't insider trading? In which case why suspend him?

Good point.

I'm assuming it's not illegal to bet on losing your job - but maybe technically it could be considered as insider trading? I don't really know.

It doesn't look good though does it - even if you haven't broken any law. An election is called, and politicians are running around trying to make some money out of it, as opposed to focusing on 'the country'. A bunch of opportunists.

Dinahmo

Casdon

A Labour candidate has been sacked now - for betting against himself. How bizarre. How many more will come out of the woodwork I wonder.
news.sky.com/story/labour-candidate-suspended-as-gambling-commission-launches-investigation-13158716

But I assume that he wasn't insider trading? In which case why suspend him?

I assume the L party know all too well it lays them open to guilt by association by the public and voters may not make the distinctions we have. Right leaning Red Tops, "they're it too", etc etc.

Wyllow3

Dinahmo

Casdon

A Labour candidate has been sacked now - for betting against himself. How bizarre. How many more will come out of the woodwork I wonder.
news.sky.com/story/labour-candidate-suspended-as-gambling-commission-launches-investigation-13158716

But I assume that he wasn't insider trading? In which case why suspend him?

I assume the L party know all too well it lays them open to guilt by association by the public and voters may not make the distinctions we have. Right leaning Red Tops, "they're it too", etc etc.

Oh, I'm sure the right-wing red-tops would have made the legal distinction quite clear when reporting on the Labour candidate, in the interests of impartiality.

Dinahmo

You could say that it's a bet he would not have placed had not Sunak called an election, and then you could go down all sorts of legal avenues of buts and ifs. But I'm sure you can work out why he did suspend him, and the reaction from certain quarters had he not.

Ultimately, he's in a catch22 situation isn't he.

Suspending him generates a "but-why-suspend-him-if-he's-done-nothing-wrong" from those who think as you do - and if he hadn't suspended him there would be accusations that Starmer was being a hypocrite.

So, either way, he can't win this one can he - he'll be damned because he did, and would be equally damned if he didn't. And I can't believed that you're not aware of that.

Dickens

Wyllow3

Dinahmo

Casdon

A Labour candidate has been sacked now - for betting against himself. How bizarre. How many more will come out of the woodwork I wonder.
news.sky.com/story/labour-candidate-suspended-as-gambling-commission-launches-investigation-13158716

But I assume that he wasn't insider trading? In which case why suspend him?

I assume the L party know all too well it lays them open to guilt by association by the public and voters may not make the distinctions we have. Right leaning Red Tops, "they're it too", etc etc.

Oh, I'm sure the right-wing red-tops would have made the legal distinction quite clear when reporting on the Labour candidate, in the interests of impartiality.

Dinahmo

You could say that it's a bet he would not have placed had not Sunak called an election, and then you could go down all sorts of legal avenues of buts and ifs. But I'm sure you can work out why he did suspend him, and the reaction from certain quarters had he not.

Ultimately, he's in a catch22 situation isn't he.

Suspending him generates a "but-why-suspend-him-if-he's-done-nothing-wrong" from those who think as you do - and if he hadn't suspended him there would be accusations that Starmer was being a hypocrite.

So, either way, he can't win this one can he - he'll be damned because he did, and would be equally damned if he didn't. And I can't believed that you're not aware of that.

I wouldn’t describe Sky News as a red top in any sense of the word Dickens, and this was their analysis.
news.sky.com/story/scale-of-gambling-scandal-for-tories-is-different-magnitude-to-labours-issue-13158755

I think KS was right to immediately suspend the Labour candidate for betting against himself. No, it may not be ‘illegal’ but it’s stupid. If candidates in an election bet against themselves, what does that say about their desire to win the seat and their loyalty to the party?

Why would KS want such a person as a potential Labour MP? Good riddance!

Casdon

Dickens

Wyllow3

Dinahmo

Casdon

A Labour candidate has been sacked now - for betting against himself. How bizarre. How many more will come out of the woodwork I wonder.
news.sky.com/story/labour-candidate-suspended-as-gambling-commission-launches-investigation-13158716

But I assume that he wasn't insider trading? In which case why suspend him?

I assume the L party know all too well it lays them open to guilt by association by the public and voters may not make the distinctions we have. Right leaning Red Tops, "they're it too", etc etc.

Oh, I'm sure the right-wing red-tops would have made the legal distinction quite clear when reporting on the Labour candidate, in the interests of impartiality.

Dinahmo

You could say that it's a bet he would not have placed had not Sunak called an election, and then you could go down all sorts of legal avenues of buts and ifs. But I'm sure you can work out why he did suspend him, and the reaction from certain quarters had he not.

Ultimately, he's in a catch22 situation isn't he.

Suspending him generates a "but-why-suspend-him-if-he's-done-nothing-wrong" from those who think as you do - and if he hadn't suspended him there would be accusations that Starmer was being a hypocrite.

So, either way, he can't win this one can he - he'll be damned because he did, and would be equally damned if he didn't. And I can't believed that you're not aware of that.

I wouldn’t describe Sky News as a red top in any sense of the word Dickens, and this was their analysis.
news.sky.com/story/scale-of-gambling-scandal-for-tories-is-different-magnitude-to-labours-issue-13158755

I wouldn’t describe Sky News as a red top in any sense of the word Dickens, and this was their analysis.

It wasn't Sky News I had in mind - rather how the Mail or Express would have worded their report had Starmer not suspended the candidate.

This, from Microsoft News gives me the feeling that the gloves are well and truly off, and the Tories and RW media will use all any opportunities to attack Starmer.^

Mr Sunak meanwhile is being urged to “go for the jugular” and launch more direct personal attacks against Sir Keir to turn round the Tories’ faltering campaign.
The prime minister has been warned he has not focused enough on the Labour leader and he needs to go after Sir Keir’s record. With the Conservatives still more than 20 points behind Labour in the polls, cabinet ministers have called for a change in direction and questioned whether the PM is comfortable enough launching personal attacks against his opponents.

If he, Starmer, had not suspended him, do you think under the present climate that it would have gone unnoticed? The Tories and the RW media are looking for any opportunity, valid or not, to discredit him.

I'm not defending Starmer, I'm disillusioned with him - I just dislike pretence, and in this case, the pretence is "oh, look, Starmer's suspended what's-his-name-why-did-he-do-that?"

Judging by the way his father's ownership or not of a factory/ his duration at CPS / Beergate, etc, have all been gone over with a fine tooth comb in order to find faults and inconsistencies, I'm pretty sure he did it to try to stall the media. It may not be on the same scale as the Tory gambling scandal, but I'm not ure such 'minor' details matter when you're going for the jugular.

Desperate times call for desperate measures I think Dickens, but to be fair to Sky I did think that was a balanced analysis. The real problem for the Tories now is that they, and the media have cried wolf so many times that the public have stopped listening. If anything sinks Labour now I suspect it will be of their own making rather than what the Tories say. What I still don’t get though is why they don’t go for Reform more, at least then they would emerge with more seats, and some dignity intact.