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.

iwishihadknownmore
Hilarious is Jenrik

I thought his jokes were quite good -

Then you’ve got David Lammy, our Foreign Secretary. He’s the one who went on Celebrity Mastermind and said that Henry VII succeeded Henry VIII. He’s not quite a celebrity, certainly not a mastermind, but he’s banging on about a ceasefire – and that’s just between Sue Gray and Morgan McSweeney.

@Clavinova "Tom Baldwin's biography strongly implied that Starmer cheated on one of his long term girlfriends - which is why they split up."

When was this?

If I remember correctly he would have been aged about 30.

Although Keir keeps referring to Rishi as the prime minister, Labour are actually the ones in power. I wouldn't focus on the Conservatives so much. Unless you think they will be back in Government soon.

@Clavinova "Tom Baldwin's biography strongly implied that Starmer cheated on one of his long term girlfriends - which is why they split up"
So Tom Baldwin "strongly implied" that Starmer cheated on a girlfriend when he was 30- 13 years before he married. Obviously unacceptable behaviour. But hardly evidence that he is a potential "womaniser" in his 60s!!!

I don’t think it’s ever been seriously suggested that Starmer is a “womeniser” and I seriously hope he’s not. If he was found out to be now I think it could finish his political career. Rayner on the other hand is also very hypocritical in that regard…..

I’m very grateful to you @Clavinova. As a result of your assertion that Starmer is a womaniser I bought and downloaded Baldwin’s biography last night. It’s got off to a cracking start so I’m very grateful.

On what grounds is Rayner hypocritical? She’s single, isn’t she?

Deflection... yes they wont be in power, judging by the candidates statements and record in Government/parliament, not for many years, perhaps never again.

The leader of the opposition is a serious role, having someone Jenrik) in that role, who believes uk troops are killing people, here in the UK, to prevent being granted permanent leave to stay, is quite frankly beyond weird.

Only you could compare that to a one off mistake, one thing is certain though, there is nothing a Tory can say or do that people like you would criticise.

@BIossomtoes As a married but separated woman, Rayner had a relationship with a married but separated man. She then had the audacity to criticise Matt Hancock, who, while still married, was videoed publicly snogging a married woman. He then woke his own small children to tell them he was leaving. She also criticised Boris Johnson, that paragon of moral rectitude and sexual continence.

Rayner made a massive deal out of Matt Hancocks (I agree, totally awful) affair. Whilst simultaneously having one herself, with Sam Tarry, whom she claimed to have split up with in November. But also spent New Year with in New York in the freebie apartment. For “a couple of nights” which was actually five. And didn’t declare he was there.
She’s a big believer in rules is Angela - one rule for her and another for everyone else.

While I'm not sure you know who "people like you" are, I agree that there certainly is deflection going on. Of some sort, anyway...

Hancock and his lover were both married and Hancock was Health Secretary, telling us all to stay at home and avoid mixing.

Rayner criticised him for this, as did plenty of others including tories.

Are you saying married people who have separated shouldn't have relationships? quite puritanical.

@iwishihadknownmore not at all. But by all accounts Mr Tarrys wife did not know they were separated!

Why should she declare he was there? What business is it of anyone else? As @CurlewKate points out both of them are separated from their spouses. I believe you recently asserted I was splitting hairs, you appear to be stretching morality to breaking point.

Mrs Tarry has known they were separated since 2022.

Why was she in NYC anyway.

Why was she there over new year when presumably government offices were shut?

Why did she bring her unofficial partner?

She's not going for work purposes.

Why did she therefore accept a free non work holiday from a relative stranger.

Why did Lord Alli give her a free holiday? What did he want in return.

Those are the relevant questions.

@Nordione1 Out if interest, do you know anything about Waheed Alli?

Why was she in NYC anyway. On holiday

Why was she there over new year when presumably government offices were shut? On holiday

Why did she bring her unofficial partner? She was on holiday

She's not going for work purposes. No, she always said she was on holiday

Why did she therefore accept a free non work holiday from a relative stranger. She says he’s a personal friend and he lent her his flat, she paid for everything else.

Why did Lord Alli give her a free holiday? He didn’t, he lent her a flat.

What did he want in return. Why would he want anything, people do nice things for friends, not every relationship is transactional.

Those are the relevant questions

Why? Labour were in opposition, all declared.

As you have said, what happens and is said in opposition doesn't matter....

Well I know about his background from the fact he's been headline news for weeks (you may have a more personal insight obviously) and that defenders of the Labour members who received treats from him do try and make out that his actions are in some way legitimate by saying he has some special position that allows him to bestow treats without criticism or question. I'm not sure that flies.

The Labour cabinet really are what Rosie Duffield said they were

@Nordione1 You really are ever so cryptic.

If you were saying that members of Parliament should not receive gifts in money or in kind from anyone, I would be absolutely with you. But at the moment there is a process where such gifts can be accepted if certain rules are adhered to. I may be wrong, but I don't think any of the current Labour government have broken any of those rules. In fact, the reason we know about all this stuff is because the rules were kept.

Not cryptic. I've said what I think throughout your thread. It just seems to be going round in circles and some Labour supporters seem to be trying to persuade themselves that things are clean or "the tories". I don't agree. But it's all been said before in the thread.

Is this the same Rosie Duffield who took 12k in campaign funds & flights to USA and Taiwan, valued at over £20k?

Or a different, more honest Rosie Duffield? who spoke out against greed and gift taking months/years ago, when they were first published on the Register of Members Interests?

Bit like yourself really.

Goose and Gander come to mind.

@Nordione1 "some Labour supporters seem to be trying to persuade themselves that things are clean or "the tories". I don't agree."

But things are clean. You may not agree with the way in which cleanliness is assessed, but it's undeniably clean.