Starmer took donor’s gifts because there is no taxpayer funding for clothes

[MrsRobinsonsHandprints]

Mind-blowing

Oh ok, so it's ok to do these things because other politicians have done it.

What’s wrong with female Ministers/ other halves saying publicly ‘I live within my means and only buy what I need and can afford, given my other spending priorities. Therefore, I’m not interested in criticism of my person or clothing. Like most working women , I do the best I can with what I have!’

They should set the tone and not be dragged down into the shallow focus on female appearances. Angela Merkel didn’t give a stuff.

This approach would I believe have generated goodwill in most spheres, if not the fashion industry!

According to Politics Today, Starmer has accepted more freebies than the last 5 labour leaders combined, or since 1997 when records began. No idea if that’s true, but it was stated on the BBC and a quick google does suggest it is.
I cannot believe the utter short sightedness of this. We are all going to get whacked over the head with an awful budget, which will obviously limit the spending power of a lot of us. But he and Ang can offset that by getting freebies from some Lord who wants a security pass?
It is such a political misstep, I cannot believe they don’t have advisors to stop them doing this shit? It’s a massive loss of credibility for a party than ran on a platform of moral superiority. Angela Rayner is going to be politically dismantled by her own words on her X account 🤦‍♀️

I agree he can afford his own suits etc but the article is wrong because the land was sold in 2020 and Starmer got about £200k for it after tax. I don’t know how much he paid for it in the first place.

And the not declaring it.

Of course he can afford it. For a high level function one off she can just rent the dress. More sustainable

I mean - what did we expect really... why did anyone think he would be not corrupt?! I dont support Labour - but even i thought he was better than this.....

No but he stands on a ticket of being good and above corruption. The big point is he didn't declare and he gave the donor access passes to parliament

So so dirty. So corrupt

@AncientAndModern1

Where are these millions supposed to have come from? He has long had salaried jobs. He got £200k a year as DPP and a lot less as an MP & leader of the opposition and still doesn’t earn that as PM, which is mad.
He inherited 7 acres in Surrey which depending on where you read is worth between £8-11 million.

His house was bought for £600k and is now worth double.

It's been averaged out and he has a net worth conservatively valued at £7.7 million

@AncientAndModern1

In March 2023, it was revealed that Sir Keir Starmer had recently paid £118,580 in UK tax. The revelation came after Sir Keir released his own tax returns, responding a day after Prime Minister Rishi Sunak published details of his finances.

So he must have been getting a pretty heavy salary/fees/payouts to be paying that much tax

Nothing stopping you. pick the ticket you want to run on and put yourself up for election

Fuss about nothing. I used to work for an accountancy practice which dealt with high net-worth individuals in the public eye (including some very well known household names). Clothing worn in the course of their work or to attend specific events is an allowable expense, if it specifically for that purpose. So for instance a new outfit worn for a televised awards ceremony would be an allowable expense. I dare say that Mr & Mrs Starmer now have to attend a large number of extremely formal and/or official functions together, so I can see no problem in using these funds in this way, especially since they have actually properly declared it.

David Lammy is entertaining isn’t he?, he recently said people in the UK should stamp their feet in support for Ukraine. Just what you need when Russia is bombing you isn’t it? A load of Brits stamping their feet.

This will be a one term Government.

Poor Keir, no clothing allowance ☹️ just like the working class. Has he tried Primark?

@landris ok, so if I am nominated for an award, the outfit I buy to attend said awards event is an allowable expense?

His surname is Starmer

This is exactly the point - it had to be bought and expensed. They accepted donations and didn't declare it instead.
Cloths is not an issue, their behavior is

So you tell us when Labour denounced these things in the past you expected they would do the same or worse when in government?

Carrie Johnson hired her outfits, couldn't Starmer's wife do the same

Actually, it seems as if, in living memory at least, yes he he is - for his wife certainly, and for him too I think

Appreciate it's very politically incorrect to say this and irrelevant to the topic, but it feels awkward for a man to allow another man to pay for his wife cloths, just basic pride issue?

That’s not true. The ‘land’ - a field where his parents kept donkeys - wasnt inherited. He bought it for them. He sold it after his father’s death in 2022 and Starmer got about £220k after tax. Not sure how much was profit. He’s not poor by any means and should be able to afford clothes, but he’s not a multi millionaire either. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68322058.amp

£52k was capital gains tax on the sale of the field he bought so his parents could keep donkeys. It was a one off sale that netted him
about £220k after tax (less whatever he paid for it originally in the 90s). He’s not poor but the millions are a myth

But thé différence is, your high net worth clients presumably paid for their own clothes , because otherwise they would not have been able to claim them against tax. The Prime Minister and his wife have accepted money from a member of the Louse of Lords to pay for their clothes and their glasses.

Quite apart from the blatant corruption, it’s humiliating, the ex Director of Public Prosecutions claims not to be able to afford a pair of specs. Specsavers start at £15 a pair…..

It’s generally reckoned that all PMs get hooked on the power and trappings pretty quickly and if they cling on long enough they go mad.

I’m increasingly convinced that Starmer’s short time in big politics and his own high opinion of himself has made him more susceptible to flattery and freebies than a seasoned politician would be. I suspect he’ll go mad quite swiftly too.