The stakes are pretty high for Rishi Sunak. Five weeks ago, the Prime Minister staked the House on his belief that a summer general election might give his Conservative Party a better chance of retaining power than waiting until the autumn.
A snap general election was Sunak’s last throw of the dice. But it turned out that in the days before he stood alone in the pouring rain on May 22 and told the country he was going to the polls, some colleagues and subordinates were making more practical bets.
Looking back at figures from the week leading up to Sunak’s announcement, bookmakers noticed a surge in betting on the election date. The stakes were small – just a few thousand pounds in total – but the sudden frenzy of activity was enough to warrant further investigation.
The question of whether the bets were made by political officials using inside information about Sunak’s intentions to make a quick profit has dominated the Conservative Party’s final days in power. It also outlines how some voters feel about the party that has governed Britain for 14 years.
“This whole thing reinforces the public’s previous concerns,” said Luke Terrill, executive director of the research group More Common Ground. “That’s the heart of the matter: ‘There’s one rule for them and there’s a rule for everyone else.'”
Craig Williams is one of Mr Sunak’s key parliamentary aides and a Conservative candidate for office. He was the first person to come under scrutiny for the July general election, which was held on 19 September, three days before the election of prime minister. Now suspended from the race, he admits he made an “error of judgment” but insists he did not commit a criminal offence.
A number of other senior Conservative Party staff have also been named under investigation as the Gambling Commission, the regulator that oversees Britain’s rich and varied betting industry, widens its inquiry.
Among them are the party’s campaign director, Tony Lee, and his wife, Laura Saunders. Suspension.
Nick Mason, the Conservative Party’s data director, has taken leave after learning he was also under investigation. There are rumors that the investigation may soon identify a number of other Tory staff.
Meanwhile, a police officer protecting Sunak was arrested on suspicion of placing bets on the timing of the election, and the Metropolitan Police have confirmed that a number of other law enforcement officials are being investigated.
The scandal is another blow for Sunak, who is campaigning not to win the election scheduled for July 4 but to stem potential losses for the party.
He had already caused uproar after he left the 80th anniversary commemorations of D-Day early for a television interview, a decision he later apologized for. He was then widely ridiculed when he claimed he had endured hardship as a child because his parents would not allow him to watch satellite television.
Pollsters say the gambling accusations add to the damage and create a sense that the party considers itself above moral issues and insular.
Michael Gove, one of the Conservative Party’s most high-profile lawmakers, told the Sunday Times that perhaps most corrosive is “the perception that we operate outside the rules we set for others”. “This caused havoc during the ‘partygate’ period,” he said, referring to the scandal over Boris Johnson’s lockdown-busting parties in Downing Street during the pandemic, “and it’s causing havoc here.”
Political betting is a growing industry — more than $1.5 billion has been bet on the outcome of the 2020 U.S. presidential election, making it likely to be the largest single gambling event ever — but insiders say the nature of the market over when the election will be held is an undefined niche.
One long-time expert on political betting says they are actually run as novelties, designed to attract public attention and hopefully attract new customers.
They were not designed to generate huge returns, he said. The bookmakers’ goal is simply not to lose money on them, and their assumption is that someone — not just lawmakers but officials from all parties — has better information than they do. To limit losses, they limit the amount of money anyone can put into the market.
Bets made in the days leading up to Sunak’s announcement fit that bill. For example, Mr Williams was accused of betting just £100 ($125), when his winnings were supposed to be only a few hundred pounds. Joe Twyman, director of public opinion consultancy Deltapoll, said: “For senior figures in politics, the money is not life-changing.”
Indeed, the smaller size of the market may first alert authorities to unusual activity: in markets such as horse racing or football, such spikes may go unnoticed.
The UK has a strange relationship with betting, perhaps best exemplified by its place in sport. For example, in football, just like in baseball, players are completely prohibited from betting on their sport.
Last year, England striker Ivan Toney was banned for six months for gambling. Brazilian midfielder Lucas Paquetá could be banned for life if he is caught gambling on matches he plays. He strenuously denies the accusations.
However, both Mr Toni and Mr Paqueta play for club teams – Brentford and West Ham United respectively – which were sponsored by gambling companies last season. They play in stadiums plastered with bookmaker logos. Brentford owner Matthew Benham bought the club with money earned from his hugely successful career as a professional sports gambler.
This cognitive dissonance around gambling is common in the UK. If gambling took place in one of the thousands of bookmakers’ shops on the country’s high streets, it would be seen as a social blight, a disturbing and harmful addiction.
If it’s at Royal Ascot and you’re wearing a nice hat, it’s the social event of the season. It is telling that Mr. Williams, the prime minister’s aide, described his bet as a “quiver,” a British little bet that is essentially trivial, harmless and fun.
Experts say the election scandal resonates with voters not because they disapprove of all gambling but because it suggests something about the morality of the ruling party.
“It encapsulates what everyone is already thinking,” Mr. Twyman said. “It reinforces the existing narrative built around the historical issue of Partygate. And it has an opportunity cost: people are talking about this instead of what the Conservatives want them to talk about.
Mr Terrill, of More in Common, said it was amazing how much it affected ordinary people. Its figures show the betting scandal, Sunak’s D-Day gaffe and his comments on cable television have become the campaign’s defining topics.
Trier said the accusations didn’t have much of an impact on the polls, but it should be of little relief to the Conservatives because it doesn’t reflect how little the public cares, but how many voters have turned against him political parties. “A lot of people have left,” he said.
That’s certainly the bookmaker’s view: the Conservatives are currently odds-on 70/1 to remain in power on July 4th.
