I am a Labour voter, a Labour supporter and I do not regret my vote.

[CurlewKate]

However, I think that Starmer has been incredibly stupid and/or very badly advised over this expenses issue. He has done nothing wrong, but his behaviour is not what he led us to believe he would do, and I am incredibly exasperated and disappointed.

In my opinion, he should admit that he made a massive misjudgement, and agree to take no more freebies from now on.

Apart from anything else anything which allows people to say "They are all as bad as each other" (they aren't) is a distraction from the real issues the country faces. He should be laser focussed on repairing the damage caused by 14 years of Tory misrule. Not scrambling around dealing with peripheral stuff.
Starmer-say sorry. Don't do it again. And get back to work.

You must have very poor comprehension skills. I understand it perfectly.

Thank you and that's great.

KS has declared the most valuable freebies of any current MP. He had a whopping £76,000 worth during the election alone. His latest income was £404,000 but he cannot buy his own clothes?? Labour voters need to understand this actually matters. He’s declaring vast amounts of freebies and income.

Yep

Evidence of bribery - not yet, but

Please check Labour stance on trans and women's rights, their policy about Gender Recognition Act

Then google Lord Alli and Stonewall

For me it makes a very uncomfortable reading

Apologies for saying I didn't understand much of your post. I will have a go at replying to what I think you are trying to say.

I think you are being a bit disingenuous there. You did say that you would accept a gift of a holiday from a friend that is true. The implication being that Angela Raynor and her boyfriend were given that holiday by Lord Alli as just mates and that they have no work connection with him. I think that's a difficult argument to make. I suppose Labour will spin it like that though depressingly and they will just expect everyone to agree and move along. And the gravy train will continue as Keir clearly wants.

And you keep repeating "but the Tories too" line as if that is a proper answer to criticism of the free stuff culture. If everyone took the attitude that the other people do it so we can too, nothing will change. It's not a tribal issue. It's a problem in the whole political establishment.

What nonsense. How is living somewhere else for some normality while sitting GCSEs buying an unfair advantage in education? The bitterness on this thread is astounding.

“Living somewhere else for some normality”? In a Covent Garden luxury penthouse? So the son can mug up on acids and alkalis and irregular verbs?

You are having a laugh.

I don’t feel remotely bitter about anything Starmer’s done, Reeves has done, Rayner’s done, or any of them. If anything they’re providing some much needed comic relief.

And you keep repeating "but the Tories too" line as if that is a proper answer to criticism of the free stuff culture. If everyone took the attitude that the other people do it so we can too, nothing will change. It's not a tribal issue. It's a problem in the whole political establishment.

The 'but the Tories...' thing is properly getting on my wick. Yes, we know they had noses in the trough, but the Tories have never claimed to be whiter than white, without sleaze. But that was the platform Labour stood on pre-election.

The rank hypocrisy is the problem, as well as the system which allows it to happen.

The usual Labour fans are just making themselves look like hypocrites too, quite frankly, with the attempts to now defend what's happening. You can bet they'd have a different approach if the boot was on the other foot!

The point is that VAT is being added to school fees for idealogical reasons as it won't raise much money overall. The reasons cited include that it is unfair to buy educational advantage over anyone else. Or be given that financial advantage by a donor due to your position.

Why do all paths of discussion appear to lead back to VAT on school fees? There are zero parallels between VAT on school fees and his son being given a quiet place to study while sitting his GCSEs. How is that buying educational advantage unless all other DC sitting GCSEs are distracted by fighting their way through journalists to get outside their front door?

I ve repeated, TWICE, that i don't agree with the Rayner trip but you keep replying that i am supporting her....

I fail to understand why you keep doing this:

I also said Rayners stay in NY was wrong, even if within the rules

Is this not clear enough for you?

I have never said "but the Tories" however, i find it very odd that criticism goes only to Labour and no one else, nor do you or others recognise that Labour have acted within the rules, now you may not like those rules but the previous administration had 14 years to change them and did not.

It is possible to be critical of both main parties, as i have done, there is also a question of scale, Labour have accepted private donations, Tories took tax payer money and used it to fund their own interests but a suit is far more important to you.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-59968037

You don't acknowledge that the problem with Labour is the hypocrisy. As well as the system which allows it.

It was in response to you saying that if someone offered you a free villa in France you would take it. It was in relation to the discussion about free holidays and Angela Raynor. My reply was simply that I wouldn't if there was any work involvement.

I don't think anyone here is arguing that the Tories behaved well. I do see why you bring them up in your posts, but I don't think the distraction technique is working particularly effectively as people are fairly switched on to the dodgy ways of politicians.

I also think Labour are particularly egregious hypocrites thinking back to all the moralising Keir did to Boris while, as it transpires, being happy to do the same himself. It's not just a suit, let's face it. Keir has the highest freebies of any MP by miles. £107,000, the runner up being Labour's Lucy Powell on £40,000.

I don't think all paths lead back to school fees. But it was one of the most important policies that Labour put forward before the election. It won't raise money, it may cost money and therefore is being done for idealogical reasons

Lookong therefore at those ideaological reasons, the main one seems to be parents should not be able to buy educational advantage as it is unfair on the children that dont get that advantage.

The average child revising for GCSEs does not have access to an £18 million penthouse if things are noisy at home. That's an advantage given by a rich donor due to his father's position. That's unfair ( if you use Labour's approach to judging whether education advantage should be able to be bought). Penthouses should be available to all children so all children have a peaceful, tranquil and luxurious place to revise. Consistency is important and Keir should walk the walk and set an example. But he won't because he thinks "it's the right thing to do". I'm not from Yorkshire so apologies if I get the saying wrong but it's "rule for thee and rule for me"

Keir has the highest freebies of any MP by miles. £107,000

Any MP in the current parliament. Given the number of new MPs and the number of former MPs who stepped down or were kicked out by their voters, that’s not really a particularly meaningful measure. And that money has been donated over the last five years.

the runner up being Labour's Lucy Powell on £40,000.

Which were expenses incurred as a shadow minister to attend events attended by the minister she was shadowing whose expenses were funded by taxpayers. Also over a period of five years.

Incorrect. Keir accepted £86,708 of gifts in the last Parliament (where he wasnt even in government). £20, 437 in this Parliament (quick work). The highest of any MP across the same period.

I referred to Lucy Powell to emphasise the gap between Keir and the runner up and quite how avaricious Keir has been compared to everyone else.

You seem to have a distorted perspective on the significance of the VAT policy. VAT on school fees was always a very peripheral policy that only directly affects a tiny minority of people. Most Labour voters are voting on other far more significant policies like the NHS and don't care about it.

Of course the few weeks in an alternative space is not giving the boy any educational advantage, just some peace and quiet away from the circus. Why inflate the significance of VAT and school fees on one hand yet harbour such mean spiritedness towards another child, just because he is Starmer's son. It's a bit hypocritical.

That’s simply not true. Johnson accepted £200k just for his flat decorations in the last parliament, as well as £23k for his wedding and those are just the ones I remember off the top of my head.

Lucy Powell was Shadow Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport for less than two years (29 November 2021 - 4 September 2023);

https://members.parliament.uk/member/4263/career

Hospitality gifts from September 2023;
https://members.parliament.uk/member/4263/registeredinterests

Those donations in the last year amount to £3.7k @Clavinova, not £40k.

Johnson refunded the donors for the flat decoration after the outcry;

In March [2021] Downing Street insisted Johnson had met all the costs personally. It later turned out others had originally footed the bill but he then came up with the money himself and the original payees were refunded.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/jan/06/what-did-second-investigation-into-boris-johnson-flat-refurb-find

The Electoral Commission investigation stated the amount as £112,549.12, not the estimated £200,000.

Doesn’t matter. He still took the money. I can’t see you saying it’s all fine if Starmer repaid the money donated to him. And £112.5k and the £23k donation for the wedding still total more than £107k.

Over £4,000 actually. It was just an illustration - I haven't looked at previous years - why did Lucy Powell need to accept seven hospitality events after she stepped aside from the shadow post?

Still ignoring that is the hypocrisy of Keir that's the issue.

ETA: Johnson never claimed he wasn't a nose-in-trough grifter.