To think Keir Starner is ignoring women and children’s rights?

[Greengablesfables]

Hello hello? Kier? We’re here. We are right here. We are Women. Are you listening to us? Hello? Hello?

Still did it though, despite the fact she is in a position to benefit from it once he leaves politics. Indeed, the fact she doesn’t now is purely voluntary.
nothing will ever be enough. As I sad, really sad. For us, not them.

pointythings
I also haven't forgotten that men in female NHS wards has all happened under the current government

What's this?

Jan 2008
The [Labour] Government says it is no longer committed to its long-term promise to scrap mixed-sex hospital wards.

https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/government-abandons-promise-to-eliminate-mixedsex-wards-775250.html

@Marjoriefrobisher most people don’t like their record in government. Now they seem to be offering crumbs as a kind of bribery. I think that’s the issue. And the point scoring hypocrisy. Like cancelling HS2 costing billions but complaining that labour want to future secure our energy utilities by creating GB energy and are also spending money.

Again because labour were going to and they wanted their thunder. They wouldn’t have done it had labour not mentioned it.

Tootiredforallthiscrap

All this gender ID and men in female prisons has happened under the conservatives here ? Only changed their tune when they realised they would be obliterated at the GE…

This article is from July 2020 - not long after the Conservatives won the 2019 election;

Self-ID for transgender people 'unlikely' to get ministers' support.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-53411965

I quite agree that there are legitimate criticisms to be made of government policy. What is not legitimate is the determination to insinuate that Sunak and his wife are behaving dishonestly or from improper motives. As I said, the inability to accept that he might be in public life for good reasons is striking, and the associated discussion is pretty unedifying

There’s no point if you’re just going to keep saying the same thing. The point is he is part of a government that is prepared to make decisions that are financially disadvantageous to him; indeed his wife was willing to disclaim the tax advantages of her status some time ago. Yet still people insist he is politics because of improper financial motives. I think it’s reasonable to wonder why they do that.

Quite 😂

I think the principle should be that members of parliament should not directly financially benefit from Government spending decisions.

If Sunak was working for a company he'd have to recuse himself from any decisions/conversations relating to the financial and contractual relationship between his company and his wife's. It's standard in private sector. I think the same should apply to Government.

Also it would be nice if he paid full tax and his wife also. That would definitely be a big boost to UK PLC. Also might role model socially responsible behaviours in his multimillionaire peers too.

I won't hold my breath though.

Not really

Some pp only post on these threads to say stop talking about this

Although I do notice actual change is welcome, despite some efforts to stop it 🤔

I actually very much enjoy Starmer outflanking the Tories.

The Conservatives spend years going on about the "brain drain" and how we need to keep non dom, Labour will bankrupt the country yadda yadda. But then when it comes to budget time they are so desperate to undermine Labour's costed plans they have no choice but to take the money and spend it elsewhere. Thus making themselves look like flip flopping U turners.

I'm enjoying the increasingly shrill demands from Sunak that Labour match their defence spending cost. While Starmer acts like Sunak is an irrelevance.

And the constant "resets". It must be quite desperate times in CCHQ trying to pick some form of narrative out of this.

The measures you describe in your second paragraph are already in place.
what tax do you think he’s not paying that you think he should be? Or is this another desperate attempt to smear his financial probity?

He paid 500,000 tax last year on income of 2.2m. That's a 23% rate.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/news.sky.com/story/amp/rishi-sunaks-tax-return-shows-he-paid-more-than-half-a-million-pounds-in-tax-last-year-13067577

It is ridiculous that a multi millionaire pays a lower rate of tax than anyone earning over £50,000 in the PAYE system.

It's not a smear, just an observation. Why are you finding the criticism of Sunak so difficult to hear?

Anyway, rather than derail further I'll just leave this for people interested in whether or not Sunak declares his conflicts of interest

https://bylinetimes.com/2023/08/24/rishi-sunaks-many-failures-to-fully-declare-his-conflicts-of-interests/

Labour: For the men. Not for you.

With their mates. Quite cute really.

But when examined, your criticism isn’t of him; it’s of the current tax system. when examined the insinuation that he doesn’t pay what owes falls apart. And you do this continually. I ask again; why the determination to insinuate he and his wife are guilty of impropriety? Where does this come from? It’s not criticism, which no one can legitimately object to (although they may disagree); it’s the naked desperation to insinuate they are guilty of financial wrongdoing which is deeply odd and calls for explanation.

this establishes that you are not alone in your determination to smear the Sunak/Murthys but it does no more than that, I’m afraid.
ill keep asking; why is it so important to you to try and make out they are not honest? Where does it come from? There’s a million more substantive criticisms you could make. Why the desperation to cling to this? It’s weird.

I certainly don't "do this continuously". I was responding to your initial comment that implied that the myth of Starmers child's gender identity was equivalent to the reality of Sunaks tax affairs.

I'm not voting Conservative, in part because its ridiculous that millionaires pay a lower tax rate than just about managing PAYE earners. Others may make different choices. Up to them.

you are doing it continuously. Every attempt you make to suggest they are guilty of impropriety falls apart. Yet instead of acknowledging this you keep on desperately trying. When there are many real, substantial criticisms of the man. Why?

Didn't Keir Starmer benefit from the same tax rate (capital gains tax) when he sold his donkey field 18 months ago?

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/feb/16/keir-starmer-paid-99400-in-uk-tax-on-404000-of-income-labour-reveals

If Keir Starmer sold his plot of land in the knowledge that Labour intends to increase capital gains tax for the rest of us, that's downright sneaky.

Wes Streeting is even worse. Used to be super into gender ideology but saying now saying ‘transwomen' aren’t women. They couldn’t care less about any vulnerable group, they just say what is politically expedient

Yup like the tories 😂

Your threads draw the crowd op ;

I do wonder how people square saying be quiet on every thread with - moving away from Self ID is good

How do they think women got there wrt political change