|
|
Post by parsley1 on Sept 22, 2024 17:23:31 GMT
I find it interesting
That Labour politicians
Like to pretend they want an equal state of play for everyone
Yet they are happy to accept free clothing and other donations
Why cannot they buy their own clothing like all other public sector workers
And claim back the tax or VAT if work related
And why do MPs still look so sh*te if they are having such things given for free
Doctors meanwhile are not allowed to accept anything other than sweets and chocolates and flowers
Doesn’t seem an equal state of play to me
Angela Rayner stated today
“She argued donations were necessary because of the expense of running for office but said it was important politicians were transparent about where they had come from”
I think she is a bullsh*t artist
Most people in public sector domains pay for all this stuff in life
Celebrities get it for free as that goes with their territory and designers may like to work with them in partnership
I find it amazing Keir Starmer and his wife can’t afford to buy their own clothes and glasses and have no shame in taking handouts like beggars
|
|
|
|
Post by oxfordsimon on Sept 22, 2024 20:09:38 GMT
It's classic Animal Farm.
Some are more equal than others.
|
|
|
|
Post by parsley1 on Sept 22, 2024 21:01:58 GMT
It's classic Animal Farm. Some are more equal than others. I think it’s particularly ironic For a Labour MP It also pretty embarrassing Having your glasses paid for by a donor Hardly inspires respect for a PM |
|
711 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by aspieandy on Sept 22, 2024 21:07:05 GMT
Doesn't make enough sense looked at through the lens we're offered. Here's a suit - let me supply a thousand drones to Ukraine? Here's a pair of specs - how about an NHS contract? A nice frock - gizza chunk of green belt? I haven't read a lot but if that's the media narrative atm, I'll wait.
Appreciate they've been out of gov for 15-years, but Sue Gray knows better. They have to find the leak/ers. Plus, they're behaving like boarding school girls raiding the fridge after lights out.
|
|
|
|
Post by oxfordsimon on Sept 22, 2024 23:33:28 GMT
This hasn't come out through leaks. This has been worked done by Sky journalists looking at the data.
Over 5 years our new PM has raked in over £20k a year in freebies. More than any other MP.
He has accepted stuff for which he called out the previous government.
He is a hypocrite.
No one needs glasses costing over £2k.
Accepting free clothing for him and his wife when they earn over £200k from their respective jobs is quite frankly obnoxious.
He was right to call out Johnson and others in the past.
He has failed to clean up politics in the way he then demanded. His nose is in the trough and he is wallowing in it.
|
|
711 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by aspieandy on Sept 23, 2024 2:35:21 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by oxfordsimon on Sept 23, 2024 7:36:54 GMT
But this thread is not about that.
There are serious questions to br answered about her pay.
But who leaked it is not one of them
|
|
3,484 posts
|
Post by ceebee on Sept 23, 2024 7:41:05 GMT
They're all as bad as each other. Hypocrites and grifters.
|
|
|
|
Post by SilverFox on Sept 23, 2024 7:45:06 GMT
The only way is Ethics.
sorry .....
|
|
|
|
Post by oxfordsimon on Sept 23, 2024 11:25:10 GMT
It seems our Deputy Prime Minister now has an official photographer who is being paid by the state.
£68k a year.
And yes I know that senior politicians have had such people in the past.
But Rayner complained about Johnson's "coterie of vanity photographers" yet now feels entitled to use public funds to do exactly the same thing.
That is called hypocrisy.
They promised to restore trust in UK politics. They have not started well.
|
|
2,339 posts
|
Post by theglenbucklaird on Sept 23, 2024 12:15:31 GMT
This hasn't come out through leaks. This has been worked done by Sky journalists looking at the data. Over 5 years our new PM has raked in over £20k a year in freebies. More than any other MP. He has accepted stuff for which he called out the previous government. He is a hypocrite. No one needs glasses costing over £2k. Accepting free clothing for him and his wife when they earn over £200k from their respective jobs is quite frankly obnoxious. He was right to call out Johnson and others in the past. He has failed to clean up politics in the way he then demanded. His nose is in the trough and he is wallowing in it. More than any current MP? Surprised Rishi doesn't appear in the top five. |
|
|
|
Post by parsley1 on Sept 23, 2024 12:17:09 GMT
Most MPs probably need a gym membership
And a PT
Probably a better use of resources
|
|
|
|
Post by oxfordsimon on Sept 23, 2024 12:22:05 GMT
This hasn't come out through leaks. This has been worked done by Sky journalists looking at the data. Over 5 years our new PM has raked in over £20k a year in freebies. More than any other MP. He has accepted stuff for which he called out the previous government. He is a hypocrite. No one needs glasses costing over £2k. Accepting free clothing for him and his wife when they earn over £200k from their respective jobs is quite frankly obnoxious. He was right to call out Johnson and others in the past. He has failed to clean up politics in the way he then demanded. His nose is in the trough and he is wallowing in it. More than any current MP? Surprised Rishi doesn't appear in the top five. Here is the report from Sky News news.sky.com/story/sir-keir-starmer-declares-gifts-and-freebies-totalling-more-than-100-000-the-highest-of-any-mp-13217287The former PM isn't in the top 10 |
|
|
|
Post by happysooz2 on Sept 23, 2024 13:14:18 GMT
Given Rishi and his wife have a net worth of £650m I suspect he can afford his own things.
|
|
2,760 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by n1david on Sept 23, 2024 13:23:26 GMT
It is worth pointing out, while I am not defending Starmer at all and I think he and his cabinet have been rather stupid, that Boris Johnson received significantly more in donations than Starmer between 2019 and 2024, but does not appear in the Sky reports because he is no longer an MP. Let's not forget the £1m donation from Christopher Harborne for starters.
Two wrongs don't make a right though, and I'm disappointed that the Labour Party didn't think through how this would appear.
|
|
|
|
Post by oxfordsimon on Sept 23, 2024 14:10:18 GMT
There is a difference between financial donations and gifts.
The current focus is on the gifts side of things.
I am in no way defending Johnson or others who have taken large sums of cash whether it is from individuals, companies or unions.
We need to get this sort of money out of politics.
It is not so much the acceptance of a huge amount of gifts and hospitality thar makes this an issue. It is the hypocritical nature of the behaviour of the new cabinet for having condemned the Tories for having accepted exactly the same sort of support that they themselves are now happy to accept.
You can't claim to want to clean up politics and to restore trust when you are behaving exactly like any other politician.
Too many enjoy the gravy train.
|
|
|
|
Post by SilverFox on Sept 23, 2024 14:10:49 GMT
Not defending anyone over this trough of goodies, but I cannot believe that Rishi's helicopter flights alone don't qualify him for the top 10. I suspect Sky News is playing with semantics (being tactful) of the term "gifts". If a donation is for a specific purpose, is that not a gift?
Two of Sunak's flights were donated at a cost of £10k to Altrincham ("The £10,000 cost of the helicopter ride was covered by another tycoon - Ferrari driving businessman Steve Parkin" - as quoted by The Mirror), and £15k was, according to the BBC ("Mr Hester has donated more than £10m to the Tories and in November gifted Mr Sunak the use of a helicopter for a political visit, valued at £15,000"). Those two trips alone place Rishi in 4th place, and we all know he amassed air-miles like no-one else. Many of which would have been funded by the taxpayer at a huge premium over 1st class rail travel.
And I am sick of them all saying "It is not against the rules" as if that normalises the greed.
|
|
2,339 posts
|
Post by theglenbucklaird on Sept 23, 2024 14:40:13 GMT
Not defending anyone over this trough of goodies, but I cannot believe that Rishi's helicopter flights alone don't qualify him for the top 10. I suspect Sky News is playing with semantics (being tactful) of the term "gifts". If a donation is for a specific purpose, is that not a gift?
Two of Sunak's flights were donated at a cost of £10k to Altrincham ("The £10,000 cost of the helicopter ride was covered by another tycoon - Ferrari driving businessman Steve Parkin" - as quoted by The Mirror), and £15k was, according to the BBC ("Mr Hester has donated more than £10m to the Tories and in November gifted Mr Sunak the use of a helicopter for a political visit, valued at £15,000"). Those two trips alone place Rishi in 4th place, and we all know he amassed air-miles like no-one else. Many of which would have been funded by the taxpayer at a huge premium over 1st class rail travel.
And I am sick of them all saying "It is not against the rules" as if that normalises the greed.
Why I was suprised Rishi never made the list. Anyway, this will be Starmer's tuition fees with any luck |
|
|
|
Post by oxfordsimon on Sept 23, 2024 14:41:17 GMT
Travel to events as PM is a different category of expenditure.
Not defending it.
But we should only compare like with like.
Accepting £4k in Taylor Swift tickets and associated hospitality is clearly not part of any official duty or Party event. It is a huge perk.
Asking others to make sacrifices whilst at the same time accepting this sort of largesse makes Starmer a hypocrite.
And given how his government is looking at major reform of the football industry, accepting this sort of gift from the Premier League is a huge potential conflict of interests.
|
|
2,339 posts
|
Post by theglenbucklaird on Sept 23, 2024 14:47:02 GMT
Travel to events as PM is a different category of expenditure. Not defending it. But we should only compare like with like. Accepting £4k in Taylor Swift tickets and associated hospitality is clearly not part of any official duty or Party event. It is a huge perk. Asking others to make sacrifices whilst at the same time accepting this sort of largesse makes Starmer a hypocrite. And given how his government is looking at major reform of the football industry, accepting this sort of gift from the Premier League is a huge potential conflict of interests. Yep, Labour party should always be held to higher standards than Tory's being socialist and principled |
|
|
|
Post by SilverFox on Sept 23, 2024 14:48:02 GMT
Travel to events as PM is a different category of expenditure. Not defending it. But we should only compare like with like. Accepting £4k in Taylor Swift tickets and associated hospitality is clearly not part of any official duty or Party event. It is a huge perk. Asking others to make sacrifices whilst at the same time accepting this sort of largesse makes Starmer a hypocrite. And given how his government is looking at major reform of the football industry, accepting this sort of gift from the Premier League is a huge potential conflict of interests. The point is that neither of these WERE official PM events - which would have been paid for by the [bottomless] public purse. So again, when is a gift not a gift? |
|
|
|
Post by danb on Sept 23, 2024 14:50:53 GMT
If companies want to give stuff away for free, for the publicity (for whatever reason) that is on them. You’d be a fool not to accept them. I don’t necessarily have a problem with politicians being afforded the same perks as celebs. A famous person is a famous person. The only muddying that bothers me is the timing. Being seen to take the winter fuel thing off of pensioners (because more than not did not financially need it) is not a good look. If that is literally the only source of untapped money the new government have found we’re in pretty dire straits. The more high profile members of the government will always be public property with snide journalists from their opposite side ready to stick the boot in the second they can. The more that a relatively minor misdemeanour is highlighted in the media, the bigger issue it becomes. It still isn’t ‘letting thousands of people die of covid whilst their mates profit from it’.
|
|
|
|
Post by oxfordsimon on Sept 23, 2024 14:59:31 GMT
Travel to events as PM is a different category of expenditure. Not defending it. But we should only compare like with like. Accepting £4k in Taylor Swift tickets and associated hospitality is clearly not part of any official duty or Party event. It is a huge perk. Asking others to make sacrifices whilst at the same time accepting this sort of largesse makes Starmer a hypocrite. And given how his government is looking at major reform of the football industry, accepting this sort of gift from the Premier League is a huge potential conflict of interests. Yep, Labour party should always be held to higher standards than Tory's being socialist and principled Starmer is not a socialist nor, on the basis of this, is he principled. It is holier than thou posturing in the past that makes this worse. He has done exactly what he condemned others for doing. |
|
|
|
Post by oxfordsimon on Sept 23, 2024 15:03:00 GMT
Travel to events as PM is a different category of expenditure. Not defending it. But we should only compare like with like. Accepting £4k in Taylor Swift tickets and associated hospitality is clearly not part of any official duty or Party event. It is a huge perk. Asking others to make sacrifices whilst at the same time accepting this sort of largesse makes Starmer a hypocrite. And given how his government is looking at major reform of the football industry, accepting this sort of gift from the Premier League is a huge potential conflict of interests. The point is that neither of these WERE official PM events - which would have been paid for by the [bottomless] public purse. So again, when is a gift not a gift? No one is challenging the accuracy of the Sky News investigation. No one is denying that the published data reflects the gifts declared according to rules set by parliamentary authorities. So interrogate those authorities for setting the gift rules in that way. Blaming the messenger is rarely a good look. |
|
297 posts
|
Post by fossil on Sept 23, 2024 15:40:46 GMT
As a pensioner, could I ask them to let me have some of the free clothing they have received. It will help me keep warm this winter....
|
|
