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

[MrsRobinsonsHandprints]

Mind-blowing

Do you remember Micheal Foot and his 'donkey jacket'? He was hauled over the coals for weeks about it, some argue it cost him the election. I think you are naive if you think how somebody looks/dresses doesn't influence us.
This is not to defend politicians accepting 'gifts'. As I've said before on this thread, I would ban all 'gifts' and donations over a very small sum, like £20 per month, to political parties. Big donors aren't stupid make sure they get what they pay for.

Actually I thought you were going to say something else, like how much a surface level, small thing can take a politician out

Like a bacon sandwich

The political cost of this out weighs having to have paid for glasses, suits and dresses

@Kendodd I do remember that and it was stupid then. Im not naive , Im saying it doesn’t matter when I vote

It doesn't matter. There are just some things that stick in the public's mind.

I have no idea why anyone is shocked.

There is zero, absolutely zero need for any MP, on the salaries and benefits they receive, to require free clothing.

If 'lady' Victoria wants a new frock let 'lady' Victoria buy it herself and if she can't afford an expensive one then let her go to Primark. Where incidentally a lot of OAPs will be going to buy their new cardigans for winter when they can't afford to heat their homes adequately.

Well we all know the type. The think they are entitled to the perks. They are affronted when anyone questions them. Don’t you know they deserve it? How dare you question me. The power goes to their heads, and because they have lived their entire life in the public sector and \ or politics they think that it’s normal.

In the real world, the provision of a car and driver would be a taxable benefit. So there’s £45k of tax a year avoided by the man of the people Sir Kier Starmer. In the real world, as a result (quite rightly) of bribery and corruption legislation £100k of gifts to an employee would be seen as corrupt, a dismissible act and, in some jurisdictions also a criminal act. But free gear Kier not only won’t accept that what he’s done, even if within the rules, doesn’t pass the common sense test and worse, has doubled down by saying he will accept more!

Meanwhile, pensioners in fuel poverty and those with the broadest shoulders will be paying…

I am a Labour supporter (voted Lib Dem locally) and I’m disgusted. I don’t remember a single item of clothing Angela Merkel wore, and she seems to have managed not to have her clothing noticed or talked about, and still do her job. Having said that, I haven’t seen VS since the elections (or before!), and can’t comment on her clothes. Embarrassing and shameful decision. I hope they learn from it.

Well that was an interesting read.

It's ALWAYS "Do As I Say, not Do As I Do" isn't it.

It has taken no time at all for the mask to fall off.

Slow handclap Labour, you'll be out in the next GE and probably for another 12+ year stint.

I expect they'll wonder Why.

In the next few days, Labour's legendary spin doctors will try and twist the narrative on this so we all realise that Free Gear Keir was right to snuffle up the freebies. Be interesting to see what they come up with because it's a very unfortunate set of coincidences they are facing, what with the winter fuel allowance and all.

He’s apparently, so far, taken more freebies than any other modern day PM ever has.

Astonishing and disappointing. ☹️

I'm.not astonished at all. It takes morals and standards to refuse free specs and free clothes and free football tickets and free Taylor Swift tickets and all other lovely free stuff offered to him by people who might want something back from him. The fact FG Keir hasn't got those morals and standards (despite knowing the rules when he lectured Boris) isn't a huge surprise unfortunately.

Or not.

And we'll end up with Angela "union" Rayner.

It’s the classic a Conservative will stab you in the chest but Labour will stab you in the back moment isn’t it. Same snouts and same trough, Labour are just better at pretending to be nice the Conservatives don’t bother trying.

I used to work in the civil service. We were not allowed to accept any gifts or hospitality because of the risk of corruption or bribery. I really struggle to see why that risk also doesn't apply (and is actually heightened) with MPs.

In any case the optics for starmer are terrible and suggests a lack of judgement by him and those advising him.

But we need to always remember, The Grown Ups are back in the room, thank goodness. So what Labour are doing with the free stuff and big pay rises for themselves (I see Sue Gray has just got a nice fat one) must be right but if the Conservatives did the same, then it would be corrupt. We just need to realise that the two tiers apply to everything Labour do and all will be well.

Haha at 'grown ups in the room' that ridiculous repeated line on here which seems to have died over free gear

Good to see a positive

Why can't we just have someone normal and honourable and good running the country for once. Why are our leaders so weak? Why can't they resist the free stuff and abusing the huge honour and responsibility they have been given? Is it really worth tarnishing the historic and great office of Prime Minister for a few free Me& Em dresses as soon as you get your foot in the door. And their last season wasn't even that good!!

Frustrating.

@Nordione1 ,

That is a really good question.

I think people get their ideas of how they should live from those around them. And senior politicians are surrounded by the super rich.

They see all their new ‘mates’ dressing in £1,000++ suits, flying 1st class or private, doing the modern ‘season’ (Wimbledon, FA cup final from a box, Glyndebourne, suite at 5 star hotel at Davos etc etc),and yet they are the PM, the single most important person in the country. And I think it is natural to think ‘I want what they’re having’!

But that doesn’t make it right and it doesn’t mean they won’t get judged for it, or have to accept their part of the Faustian pact, these donors aren’t giving out of love.

Now that religion has pretty much gone, and no one is judged for their venality (by their similarly venal peers), they need to look for a moral compass elsewhere. And so far it has proved elusive!

Yes, that’s the main point IMO. It’s the hypocrisy of Labour that’s the real issue.

It’s possible to be an honest hypocrite. But most hypocrisy, and certainly political hypocrisy, is a strong sign of dishonesty. Parading high personal standards and then forgetting all about them given half a chance is rank dishonesty.

The most significant example so far is Labour being vehemently opposed - on moral grounds - to a cut in WFA for OAPs 10 months ago and then bringing it in within days of the election!

I see no reason to trust anything this Labour government says about its values, its actions or anything else.

I am really confused- I thought Starmer DID declare the gifts properly (bar a late declaration because of confusion over his wife's clothes, which it seems they were trying to get clarity on) and within the current rules and the reason there is outrage/a story is because of the type of gift? But everyone on here is stating that he didn't declare? Also it's not possible to compare with previous leaders and PMs because the rules changed in 2022?

I am not at all happy and v disappointed with what he has been given and accepted within an ethically dubious set of rules, but it's not quite the same order of corruption as not declaring and taking gifts/favours/holidays.

As for the "pass" what type of pass is it? A visitor's pass, a staff-equivalent pass, a pass to use the PM's loo?

It's like tax avoidance and tax evasion - one legal and one is not.

Well for a start I'm pretty sure no other job would allow you to accept £76,000 of freebies, declared or not. The problem is why someone us giving him freebies and it won't be for love. It will be to get something back. In normal life and work that's called bribery. In order for people to know that as PM you are uncorruptible you need to be seen not to accept bribes or favour someone (by giving them a special pass to Number 10) because they have bought your wife some expensive clothes. There will be undoubtedly more free gifts that come to light. You don't have your nose in the trough to that extent without a few more free gifts slipping by unrecorded.

Keir also berated Boris for accepting freebies, saying that the rules were "very clear". Now it seems they aren't when it's him That's called hypocrisy.

There is a huge amount of hypocrisy in play here. What starmer and other Labour MPs said about Johnson and the tories, and their own actions. There is little difference between them.

Those with the broadest shoulders blah blah, first cut is to the WFA which will hit people on as little as 11,500 per year while starmer is bagging freebies to the tune of £100,000.

The lack of judgement, the inability to read the room, really worries me as well.

I agree there’s no wrongdoing in the freebie saga (though as you say there still questions about Lord Alli’s pass). That’s why I see no ‘scandal’ in it, so far at least.

It’s the contrast in Labour’s preachy saintliness and trumpeted concern for the vulnerable when in opposition, with its crony appointments, willingness to accept personal gifts, and maintenance of MPs’ heating allowances while taking away benefits for OAPs, when in government, that’s so loathsome.

Yes, we seem to have lost sight of a middle ground between illegal and fine.

Sometimes people have to accept that, although something might be legal, it still isn’t the right thing to do.

There was a massive fuss about totally legal tax avoidance, some of it far smaller amounts, which Starmer has threatened to crack down on. Again, clear hypocrisy.