Paul Darling OBE, QC is Chair of the ABB – the Association of British Bookmakers (aka Babies or Blood-Suckers – take your pick). He wrote an article claiming that “a curb on betting shops is bad news for vulnerable gamblers.”
This is neither an opening statement nor a closing statement. It doesn’t go anywhere and will not convince the court of public opinion. The only quantitative “evidence” in the article are numbers from a “worst-case” scenario in a KPMG report.
But the report is marked CONFIDENTIAL as it is “commercially sensitive.” It is as if the best-case scenario is for attorney’s eyes only and will not be shown to the public. Why is it “commercially sensitive?” Did the ABB instruct KPMG to use a flawed methodology?
From latest reports, Barclays is the bank with most branches at 1,464. Compare this with the merged Ladbrokes Coral at 3,370, William Hill at 2,372 and BetFred at 1,671 branches. And the ABB wants the public to help protect betting shops!
If you are not willing to disclose the best “evidence” you have, then surely you cannot win your case. It sometimes gets too hot in wig and gown, but head-scratching won’t help. Best to show the public the real deal.
Oh dear, Darling – does it look like your briefs are empty?
Content produced and sponsored by Stop the FOBTS.
Comments are closed