Starmer son finds a quiet place to study for GCSEs

I reckon it was the other way round. KS wanted his son out of the way so that he could focus on campaigning, and didn't have to listen to son's anxieties about exams or hear wife berating son for not revising enough or listen to endless repetition of quotes from Macbeth.

You know this wasn't a freebie. His son went to stay with a friend. No money was involved. Do you pay tax when you stay with a friend?

I don’t know, just saw mention of it on here (different threads), also about the dress of another Labour female politician. So you’d think people don’t care enough to make catty remarks, you’d be wrong. Still no excuse for accepting freebies BTW. They’ve also been in politics for long enough to know how to dress. I’d be all at sea if I was suddenly a PM, what do I wear?, but they’ve had time to prepare for the big jobs.

Vanity is a sin.

What's wrong with how Angela Raynor speaks btw?

Yes I can see how he would be, particularly when in Opposition. He's very charismatic and exciting. Like a Kardashian or someone.

In fairness, you already have people mocking Labour politicians for how they speak (Rayner, even the little dig 2 posts above about nasal speech), I can understand wanting to look dapper and aspirational. He can still afford half a dozen suits out of his own money.

@Fintoo are you joking? Of course he was constantly besieged my media.

I don't understand why Starmer who used to head the CPS and is a lawyer could possibly have thought accepting this was a good thing to do. I vote Conservative but I stiil was happy to give Starmer a fair chance. No politician should accept even those gifts they are allowed to accept. I would rather he wore a second hand suit and his child went to a public library to revise than this kind of gift be given by Waheed Alli

I thought that despite the strange (and strangely expensive) glasses, boring delivery, traditional Labour leader nasal speech impediment and uninspired policies we would at the very least have the promised honest and straightforward moral leadership. Strange how differently things have turned out.

Here, style inspo from Milan Fashion Week

I had high hopes of Starmer but I find this and the free clothes disgusting. The worst kind of champagne socialist. Ugh. I'm so disappointed.

Rich people have rich friends and I can see why they’d spend holidays in each other’s houses. The clothes and glasses, not acceptable, feels a bit grubby. Now they’re actually in power, I hope they learn from this that it was a stupid thing to do and bloody pay for it themselves. I read that the crinkled look is in fashion this Autumn, so this is my 2p for an up to date look with minimal expense and effort.

Political parties - fine

But individuals - not fine

Starmer is an individual.

There are plenty of “ordinary” families at private school. It’s not unusual for 20% of a school to be on a means tested bursary. There are around 1.4m stay at home parents. Most of those could afford private education for at least one child if they chose to work. There are lots of part time workers who could increase their hours to pay school fees.

You said in your previous post "Because we don’t fund political parties and they’re entirely dependent on donations."

I wanted to correct that as that's not strictly true. Their campaigning may not be funded by the taxpayer but the Opposition still receives tax payer funding. And as mentioned, membership fees. So they are not "entirely dependent on donations".

Just being pedantic. But it's useful to have the full picture.

I'm not sure how far a political party can fund itself with dresses, suits, glasses and penthouse loans. It's almost like donations to political parties are different from freebie donations to individual politicians somehow. 🤔🤷‍♀️

Ordinary families can't afford private schools though.

The average salary in this country is £34,963

Yep.

Plus they aren't the only ones to get free sports and entertainment tickets. Journalists and business people do as well.

The clothes I can understand as Lord Ali is a Labour Peer, a fund raiser for Labour and has media companies but the places to stay is completely odd.

You mean Short Money which can’t be used for political purposes. The membership fees are a drop in the ocean compared with the cost of campaigning. The Tories have only got 180,000 members and the numbers are falling all the time. That’s why they ran out of money during the election campaign.

Donations are the way all the parties are funded. If you don’t like that the only alternative is to fund them through tax and I can hear the howls of outrage already. I’m not keen on the idea myself.

That’s new Labour for you, the Tories in red. I despair of this country’s political landscape. All absolutely bloody useless.

The left doesn’t appear to need much help. does it?

The Opposition is funded by the tax payer. Parties are also funded by membership fees. So there are alternative revenue streams to donors.

So Starmer felt comfortable accepting an educational advantage for his son whilst simultaneously removing educational advantages from ordinary families. The hypocrisy of it all is galling.