There is more to my story - part three - The Dark Side of the Sun

A few weeks ago my photo appeared in a national newspaper with the caption below it "Casino interests ... Webb" and not even a question mark in sight. Also included was the text "Mr. Webb has insisted his campaign against the bookies was not aimed at protecting his casino interests." Whilst I have explained my story before on PoliticsHome's Central Lobby, there are still some who prefer to ignore the facts and print false and offensive insinuations, denigrating both me and the Stop the FOBTs campaign.

Just to clarify - I have never owned a casino and do not have any commercial interest in any casino. I do have shares in a US based casino supply company, which also owes me a fixed amount of debt, which is being paid in fixed installments.

Some have argued that if the Campaign were to be successful in ensuring a socially responsible level of staking on the high street at £2 and under, the stock of the supplier I hold shares in might appreciate. But as I have already spent over £1.5 million on the Campaign, the stock price would have to increase in value several-fold in order for me to even break level and as there is no historical evidence of significant casino to FOBT crossover play, there is no expectation that an FOBT stake reduction would have any significant impact on casino business.

So I don't have any casino interests to protect and the Campaign could not result in any "protection" of the alleged "interests". The baseless grounds of attack on me and the Campaign is typical of the pro-FOBT-status-quo advocates ignoring the facts and the evidence.      

I have profited substantially from gambling and I am putting something back through my Campaign in an area that I have a world-class understanding of. I oppose corporate wrongdoing, inadequate regulatory enforcement and British establishment acceptance of this across all sectors, but particularly gambling.

The article was also an attempt to discredit Lib Dems and my funding of them by implying that a Lib Dem asking questions in Parliament about FOBTs was influenced by my funding. The real question should be - "Why is any politician still defending the FOBT status quo?"

I provided some individual constituency Lib Dem funding where the main opponent was Labour, which was counterbalanced by some individual constituency Labour funding. The majority of my recent Lib Dem funding was to oppose the Tories.

The journalist contacted a Campaign colleague at 9.00pm on Saturday and on finding me unreachable proceeded to run the story on the Sunday, enabling him to say that I was “not available for comment."

FOBTs are the most addictive form of gambling and cause the greatest amount of socio-economic harm. Vulnerable persons in deprived communities are most at-risk.  Journalists have a duty to their readership, many of whom may be suffering FOBT harm, to present the arguments in a clear and informative way.

News outlets in the UK have lost the trust of the public in recent years following a number of high-profile scandals. My experience suggests that there is a long way to go before that is regained. I only hope that by providing the real facts about myself I can discredit the fiction that has been written about me.