Shipley Conservative Sir Philip Davies 'bet £8,000 he would lose his seat' (www.bbc.co.uk)

submitted 2 weeks ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

31 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 31 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] [email protected] 11 points 2 weeks ago

Might not be illegal but is certainly very telling about how seriously he takes being an MP.

[-] [email protected] 3 points 2 weeks ago

Just hedging his chances, if he doesn't win he wins his £8k bet, if he wins then his nose is in the trough at Westminster. It's win/win for him (and lose/lose for the public)

[-] [email protected] 5 points 2 weeks ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:

A senior Conservative candidate reportedly placed an £8,000 bet on losing his seat at the general election.Sir Philip Davies neither confirmed nor denied the wager, first reported by the Sun,, external but rejected suggestions he had done "anything illegal".Sir Philip, who has been the Tory MP for Shipley since 2005, told the newspaper he expected to lose the seat on 4 July.

Sir Philip said it was "nobody's business" whether he placed the bet or not.He said: "What's it got to do with you whether I did or didn't.

"He added: “And if anyone’s alleging I’ve done anything illegal, they’re very welcome to allege it, but I’m afraid I haven’t.”When contacted by the BBC, Sir Philip said he stood by his comments to the newspaper but did not offer any further comment.The Conservative party has also been approached by the BBC.

Live: Follow the latest news about the UK general electionPoll tracker: How do parties compare?Compare all the election manifestos and policiesWhat photo ID will you need to vote?General election 2024: All BBC stories and analysis

The report about Sir Philip came after several parliamentary candidates were accused of placing bets surrounding the date or outcome of the election.Earlier this week, the Conservative party withdrew support from Craig Williams, the candidate in Montgomeryshire and Glyndŵr, and Laura Saunders, the candidate in Bristol North West, who are both being investigated by the Gambling Commission.Russell George, a Conservative politician in the Welsh Parliament, is also facing inquiries by the regulator and has "stepped back" from his frontbench role.Meanwhile, Labour suspended Kevin Craig as its candidate for Central Suffolk and North Ipswich after learning he had placed a bet on losing his bid to become an MP.Follow BBC Yorkshire on Facebook, external, X (formerly Twitter), external and Instagram, external.

Independent - NagbeaReform UK - Simon DandyConservative - Philip DaviesLabour - Anna DixonThe Yorkshire Party - Will GrantWorkers Party of Britain - Waqas KhanChristian Peoples Alliance - Darryl Morton-WrightLiberal Democrat - Graham ReedSocial Democratic Party - Paul ShkurkaGreen - Kevin Warnes

The original article contains 395 words, the summary contains 333 words. Saved 16%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

[+] [email protected] -14 points 2 weeks ago

See, I don't care about this at all. There's no suggestion he was going to deliberately throw the election. He didn't have any inside information. He's allowed to place bets!

[-] [email protected] 42 points 2 weeks ago

It seems to me a given that you shouldn't be able to place bets on outcomes you can directly influence. This is not so different from e.g. a boxer betting on himself to lose.

[-] [email protected] 13 points 2 weeks ago

This

[-] [email protected] 17 points 2 weeks ago

Also.... Just give £8000 to charity ffs

[-] [email protected] 7 points 2 weeks ago

Think of it as a safety net, if you lose the election you lose your job.... But the winnings of that bet would then help you out.

If you win, you keep your reasonable lucrative job, no problem.

[-] [email protected] 5 points 2 weeks ago

A very good illustration of why all types of insurance are just gambling.

[-] [email protected] 3 points 2 weeks ago

That's a fair point.

[-] [email protected] 4 points 2 weeks ago

I think to most people if you can afford a "flutter" of eight grand you can afford not to be an MP.

[-] [email protected] -1 points 2 weeks ago

If you were single and earning an MPs salary it could be a bit of a no brainer - could you get a other equally or better paying job within a few months? Considering you have been a politician for the last 5 years not an SME in whatever field?

If you had a family on that salary, unsure. If you agreed it with your other half as a planned move, maybe?

[+] [email protected] -13 points 2 weeks ago

There is no indication that any of the politicians who bet against themselves intended to throw the election. Politics is not sport.

[-] [email protected] 7 points 2 weeks ago

The possibility of throwing is what makes it a bad look.

[-] [email protected] -4 points 2 weeks ago

Right, but they weren't doing that. There's no evidence they were and no motive for them to do so. The comparison with athletes is not apt. A pro footballer who bets on himself and manipulates the outcome is still a pro-footballer afterwards. A politician who bets on themselves and deliberately loses is not a politician afterwards. It does not make sense to do it.

[-] [email protected] 6 points 2 weeks ago

no motive for them to do so

I can think of 8000 motives

[-] [email protected] -1 points 2 weeks ago

That's about one tenth of the annual MP's salary. So, he has a far greater financial motive to remain an MP than he does to lose and collect the bet.

[-] [email protected] 3 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Well except for the fact that the salary option is:

granted gradually over a year period
requires you to do a full-time job

If they would be able to get even a slightly worse salaried job instead of being an MP, then the financial motive is - in contrast to your claim - actually in favour of him losing

[-] [email protected] 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

yes because "remaining an elected mp for the tories" and "not doing that" represent equal propositions in terms of effort, time and resources

[-] [email protected] 3 points 2 weeks ago

The motive is money, especially if you're pretty sure you're going to lose.

[-] [email protected] 2 points 2 weeks ago

"In the 2005 election, I busted a gut to win. I expected to lose. I had a bet on myself to lose in the 2005 election, and my bet went down the pan."

He didn't throw the '05 election, even when he bet against himself.

[-] [email protected] 3 points 2 weeks ago

so to check, you're fine with a football player betting against themselves, so long as they then happen to win?

[-] [email protected] 6 points 2 weeks ago

Sweet summer child..

[-] [email protected] -2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

The idea that anyone would put in all the work to get selected as a candidate, then decide it was a smart move to place a bet against themselves and throw the election to make a quick buck is ridiculous. There's no way you could make enough money from the bet to make it worthwhile.

[-] [email protected] 10 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

There's actually a term for it

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dummy_candidate

Or this - see the UK section

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paper_candidate

"All the work to be a candidate"...

[-] [email protected] 0 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

It requires huge amounts of work to be a candidate. I know people who've run for parliament. One of them had previously run as a total no-hoper on multiple occasions, in order to prove he knew how to campaign well enough to get selected for a seat where he had a chance. He was so burned out by the selection process that having won the selection, he actually turned down the nomination, then quit politics altogether. The idea that he'd have deliberatey thrown any of those elections is ridiculous.

[-] [email protected] 4 points 2 weeks ago

So we're just ignoring this part then?

In Britain, being nominated as a local election candidate simply involves signing some forms, with no deposit required. A paper candidate will often do no campaigning at all and so be able to submit a zero return of election expenses, simplifying the paperwork for the election agent. Paper candidates are commonly fielded in different locations by all the major parties in both local and national elections.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 2 weeks ago

In Britain, being nominated as a local election candidate simply involves signing some forms

They're not local election candidates.

[-] [email protected] 3 points 2 weeks ago

This isn't some no-name who's scraped their way in after years of effort; he's been the candidate since 2005.

Placing a bet against himself is absolutely the kind of thing that could jeopardize both his candidacy going forward, and his election chances. So "he wouldn't do all that just to throw it away" is nonsense.

The man has literally given himself financial incentive not to win and you don't see how that kind of conflict of interests is an issue? Are you real?

[-] [email protected] 1 points 2 weeks ago

Even if his only incentives were financial, he will make more money by winning than by losing, because an MP's salary and expenses are pretty good. So, even taking into account the innumeracy of your average MP, he does not have a financial incentive to lose.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 2 weeks ago

he will make more money by winning than by losing

assuming he wins, which isn't a guarantee for any tory at this point

"he's hedged his bets" isn't the justification you think it is

this post was submitted on 27 Jun 2024

57 points (98.3% liked)

UK Politics

2888 readers

217 users here now

General Discussion for politics in the UK.
Please don't post to both [email protected] and [email protected] .
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.

Posts should be related to UK-centric politics, and should be either a link to a reputable news source for news, or a text post on this community.

Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.

If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread. (These things should be publicly discussed)

Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.

Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.

[email protected] appears to have vanished! We can still see cached content from this link, but goodbye I guess! :'(

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]