whelk Posted September 19 Share Posted September 19 12 minutes ago, The Kraken said: Why is this a surprise about the PMs pay? It’s been this way for decades, the PM and senior cabinet don’t earn anywhere near as much as CEOs and top officers at major companies. Big news scoop right there. It’s like when Newquay will be warmer than Majorca Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whelk Posted September 19 Share Posted September 19 5 minutes ago, badgerx16 said: I suspect that all PMs this century were millionaires in their own right before they ever got to number 10, so it is unlikely the salary was a deciding factor for them. What pisses me off is you never see it advertised on Indeed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sadoldgit Posted September 19 Author Share Posted September 19 48 minutes ago, The Kraken said: Why is this a surprise about the PMs pay? It’s been this way for decades, the PM and senior cabinet don’t earn anywhere near as much as CEOs and top officers at major companies. Big news scoop right there. I am aware of that. I am just surprised that nothing has been done about it yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gloucester Saint Posted September 19 Share Posted September 19 2 hours ago, hypochondriac said: Even if we are charitable and accept entirely what you say, it's not a good look is it for someone who partially gained power by being different to the sleaze that had gone before. You'd think that a leader looking to be whiter than white and removing the corruption would have understood how this would look and wouldn't be doing it. Broadly I agree and Reeves is high up there as well. Private Eye has been warning for a while about the amount of just free football tickets and now he’s PM he will need to be more circumspect. As an incoming PM everyone wants to get your ear but now it’s a bit different, especially when you’ve replaced a government widely acknowledged to be almost owned by Tufton St in particular at one point (this reduced somewhat post-Truss disaster). If you promise you be different you have to broadly keep to that. The other aspect is that at least he is declaring it all. I seem to recall this was a real issue with Boris around decelerations and following procedures. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted September 19 Share Posted September 19 (edited) 9 minutes ago, Gloucester Saint said: Broadly I agree and Reeves is high up there as well. Private Eye has been warning for a while about the amount of just free football tickets and now he’s PM he will need to be more circumspect. As an incoming PM everyone wants to get your ear but now it’s a bit different, especially when you’ve replaced a government widely acknowledged to be almost owned by Tufton St in particular at one point (this reduced somewhat post-Truss disaster). If you promise you be different you have to broadly keep to that. The other aspect is that at least he is declaring it all. I seem to recall this was a real issue with Boris around decelerations and following procedures. Isn't it the case that he only declared it all after the newspaper came to him with the allegations-hence the potential investigation into the clothing bought for him and his wife? Edited September 19 by hypochondriac Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Kraken Posted September 19 Share Posted September 19 (edited) 1 hour ago, The Kraken said: Why is this a surprise about the PMs pay? It’s been this way for decades, the PM and senior cabinet don’t earn anywhere near as much as CEOs and top officers at major companies. Big news scoop right there. 12 minutes ago, sadoldgit said: I am aware of that. I am just surprised that nothing has been done about it yet. You didn’t seem very aware of it when you originally posted “What surprises me about the current wage disclosures is how little the PM is paid relative to others senior roles. Apparently the average London CEO salary is £169,500 p.a. Surely the PM role is worth more than that?” It really shouldn’t come as a surprise, to you or to anyone. Being PM, cabinet or even senior public servant has for generations been seen as something of a “sacrifice”, you could always make much more in the private sector (but the benefits of second job and life post-appointment are also very appealing). It’s literally the opposite of a surprise. Edited September 19 by The Kraken Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Kraken Posted September 19 Share Posted September 19 I quite like Starmer, he’s obviously an intelligent guy and a reasonable statesman if a bit bland. But his freebie grabbing really boils my piss, as it does with most MPs. As Ian Hislop put it when at a select committee, he asked “if you’re taking gifts from a company, what are they getting out of it.”. I find the whole thing grubby, always have. 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sadoldgit Posted September 19 Author Share Posted September 19 2 hours ago, Weston Super Saint said: Do other London CEOs have : Free house Free travel free security detail chauffeur driven cars - free helicopter when needed free plane when needed Free food Free drink Etc, etc, etc? Looking at your list again many CEO’s of major companies could probably tick off many of those benefits as being part of their package. As for the “free security detail” do you see that as a freebie or as something that clearly goes with the job as a necessity? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Duckhunter Posted September 19 Share Posted September 19 Typical Soggy to go down the rabbit hole of PM’s salary rather than address the issue of Free Gear Kiers freebies. He’ll be bemoaning footballs getting more than nurses next. I can’t believe anyone, left right, or centralist isn’t a bit surprised by Starmer’s love of a freebie. Donations are one thing, maybe the LOTO does attract a lot more of these, but to be so far ahead of other MP’s in the other category is quite something. One thing for sure, at the end of this parliament if Nige is top of the list, I doubt soggy will be taking about PM’s salary & benefits. This ain’t a great look, did his Mrs really need to attend 2 nights of a concert, can Starmer really only attend arsenal games in hospitality, and can’t he pay for a few clothes & glasses himself. Who the fuck is advising him & why did he think he could go big on cronyism knowing full well he’d filled his boots. New broom, same as the old broom? Not really, on this the new broom is worse that the old broom. How’s it go? “Things can only get better” 🕺 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weston Super Saint Posted September 19 Share Posted September 19 10 minutes ago, Lord Duckhunter said: Typical Soggy to go down the rabbit hole of PM’s salary rather than address the issue of Free Gear Kiers freebies. He’ll be bemoaning footballs getting more than nurses next. I can’t believe anyone, left right, or centralist isn’t a bit surprised by Starmer’s love of a freebie. Donations are one thing, maybe the LOTO does attract a lot more of these, but to be so far ahead of other MP’s in the other category is quite something. One thing for sure, at the end of this parliament if Nige is top of the list, I doubt soggy will be taking about PM’s salary & benefits. This ain’t a great look, did his Mrs really need to attend 2 nights of a concert, can Starmer really only attend arsenal games in hospitality, and can’t he pay for a few clothes & glasses himself. Who the fuck is advising him & why did he think he could go big on cronyism knowing full well he’d filled his boots. New broom, same as the old broom? Not really, on this the new broom is worse that the old broom. How’s it go? “Things can only get better” 🕺 To play devil's advocate, he may only be ahead because he's now declared them, whereas the others may be keeping schtum! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gloucester Saint Posted September 19 Share Posted September 19 1 hour ago, hypochondriac said: Isn't it the case that he only declared it all after the newspaper came to him with the allegations-hence the potential investigation into the clothing bought for him and his wife? Quite possibly, I must admit that with family illnesses, renovating a house and busy period of work I’ve not followed the story as closely as I might normally. I share yours and Kraken’s concerns about the levels they are reaching, the optics are not great, and whoever is in his inner circle needs to get this across quite directly. Private Eye, which I get every fortnight, has been keeping a running tally on the football tickets which I thought was getting inappropriate/disproportionate as I’m sure many others did. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitey Grandad Posted September 19 Share Posted September 19 3 hours ago, Weston Super Saint said: The only shock there is someone was so fucking stupid they gave lettuce Liz half a million! To keep her quiet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted September 19 Share Posted September 19 1 hour ago, Gloucester Saint said: Quite possibly, I must admit that with family illnesses, renovating a house and busy period of work I’ve not followed the story as closely as I might normally. I share yours and Kraken’s concerns about the levels they are reaching, the optics are not great, and whoever is in his inner circle needs to get this across quite directly. Private Eye, which I get every fortnight, has been keeping a running tally on the football tickets which I thought was getting inappropriate/disproportionate as I’m sure many others did. I agree. My point is not to make some sort of comparison with the conservative government because this government should be judged on their own terms. If anything they should be held to a higher standard given everything they've said previously. Even though I have a rather low opinion of labour, I did genuinely think they would be beginning their regime without even a whiff of impropriety given how much controversy the Tories got mired in. Keir is clearly an intelligent chap so he's not naive. He knows how things like this and other smaller controversies will play out and how overall lower level events will combine to change the perception of his party in the minds of the public. Labour in my opinion were elected largely because people were absolutely sick of the conservatives and felt that a change was required, not because there was any particular love of Starmer or his party. That being the case, you'd think this would be their big chance to prove to the country that they can be a party that people feel happy and inspired to vote for. Yes there's a very long way to go but so far the main takeaways for the average voter who doesn't follow politics much is screwing over grannys and taking big money for himself to afford tickets for Arsenal. They better have something inspiring to come out of the budget because if it's just whacking up taxes on everyone and screwing over the middle class (taxes on the increase in the value of your home for example) then Keir and his parties popularity is only going to get lower. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted September 19 Share Posted September 19 26 minutes ago, hypochondriac said: Labour in my opinion were elected largely because people were absolutely sick of the conservatives and felt that a change was required, not because there was any particular love of Starmer or his party. The problem is that they see their huge majority as vindication, rather than understanding how the vagaries of FPTP delivered a vastly disproportionate result. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whelk Posted September 19 Share Posted September 19 27 minutes ago, hypochondriac said: They better have something inspiring to come out of the budget because if it's just whacking up taxes on everyone and screwing over the middle class You know it is a few years to the next election? Being popular or not two months in is largely irrelevant. The budget isn’t going to deliver any good news I’m afraid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whelk Posted September 19 Share Posted September 19 Just now, badgerx16 said: The problem is that they see their huge majority as vindication, rather than understanding how the vagaries of FPTP delivered a vastly disproportionate result. They are not exactly doing anything radical- I wish they would be a bit more ambitious and I am not someone who is personally looking to benefit but so many areas of society need rebuilding and I’m afraid that costs. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted September 19 Share Posted September 19 (edited) 9 minutes ago, whelk said: They are not exactly doing anything radical- I wish they would be a bit more ambitious and I am not someone who is personally looking to benefit but so many areas of society need rebuilding and I’m afraid that costs. They have the majority to do it, but how much support do they enjoy in the mass media ? One slight perceived miss-step and so much negative publicity is generated, and even Chris Mason at the BBC seems happy to join in the shit stirring. Edited September 19 by badgerx16 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted September 19 Share Posted September 19 13 minutes ago, whelk said: You know it is a few years to the next election? Being popular or not two months in is largely irrelevant. The budget isn’t going to deliver any good news I’m afraid Hence my line "yes there's a very long way to go" 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saint francis Posted September 19 Share Posted September 19 Just looking at re-nationalising railways, which I always thought was a good idea. Using SNCF as a model, as I hear it's generally well thought of. The average cost per year to the French taxpayer is 15 billion euros. Divide that by 68 million people (obviously they are not all taxpayers) and that's 220 euros per person. That's a lot of money if you don't use the trains very often. Didn't realise it could be that expensive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gloucester Saint Posted September 19 Share Posted September 19 (edited) 18 minutes ago, saint francis said: Just looking at re-nationalising railways, which I always thought was a good idea. Using SNCF as a model, as I hear it's generally well thought of. The average cost per year to the French taxpayer is 15 billion euros. Divide that by 68 million people (obviously they are not all taxpayers) and that's 220 euros per person. That's a lot of money if you don't use the trains very often. Didn't realise it could be that expensive. I’d need to look into the figures more but as a country we urgently need to though for productivity because the congestion in towns and cities, which was never good, has become intolerable. If we didn’t have a portion of the workforce on a hybrid working model we’d be really stuffed. The built up places immediately near me - Cheltenham especially doesn’t move 7.30-9, and Gloucester little better. Slightly further afield Birmingham and Bristol are giant car parks at peak time and not much better on the weekends. Even towns on key routes are bad eg Stowe on the Wold around here. Whereas to Bristol and Birmingham via a short drive and park up at the station, it’s less than an hour door to door. Half what it is in the car and then you’ve got find parking etc. And you can work on the train, when the first don’t cut the services because of a lack of drivers and make the next service like a sardine can. Remember as a youngster sitting in hideous traffic in Southampton because Northam Bridge was closed or Itchen Bridge, or horrendous post-match congestion. No point in getting people fit for work via the NHS and not being able to get them to their workplace. Edited September 19 by Gloucester Saint Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted September 19 Share Posted September 19 15 minutes ago, saint francis said: Just looking at re-nationalising railways, which I always thought was a good idea. Using SNCF as a model, as I hear it's generally well thought of. The average cost per year to the French taxpayer is 15 billion euros. Divide that by 68 million people (obviously they are not all taxpayers) and that's 220 euros per person. That's a lot of money if you don't use the trains very often. Didn't realise it could be that expensive. Didn't we just agree a new deal for train drivers which kept them on their existing silly contracts and asked for no increase in productivity or negotiate any more favourable terms? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Holmes_and_Watson Posted September 19 Share Posted September 19 Not sure it's helping the PM stop accepting football freebies, by putting top of a league table. But here's Sky's take on it. https://news.sky.com/story/sir-keir-starmer-declares-gifts-and-freebies-totalling-more-than-100-000-the-highest-of-any-mp-13217287 While I'm sure they'll want to spin it as his support of football, he's an idiot if he doesn't realise everyone sees the lobbying behind those, and the other freebies he and the others can't keep themselves away from. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gloucester Saint Posted September 19 Share Posted September 19 (edited) 6 minutes ago, Holmes_and_Watson said: Not sure it's helping the PM stop accepting football freebies, by putting top of a league table. But here's Sky's take on it. https://news.sky.com/story/sir-keir-starmer-declares-gifts-and-freebies-totalling-more-than-100-000-the-highest-of-any-mp-13217287 While I'm sure they'll want to spin it as his support of football, he's an idiot if he doesn't realise everyone sees the lobbying behind those, and the other freebies he and the others can't keep themselves away from. Have Arsenal as his freebie but fade the others away would be my advice to him. He will be held to a different standard to a Tory leader, unreasonable though it is. Edited September 19 by Gloucester Saint 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gloucester Saint Posted September 19 Share Posted September 19 23 minutes ago, hypochondriac said: Didn't we just agree a new deal for train drivers which kept them on their existing silly contracts and asked for no increase in productivity or negotiate any more favourable terms? Productivity wasn’t the main issue, it was lack of trained drivers which the previous government took a positive step on by lowering the driver qualification age, otherwise it was all underpinned by overtime working to deliver a core service. Which would have cost far more. No love for either ASLEF or RMT btw whatsoever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
a1ex2001 Posted September 19 Share Posted September 19 (edited) 1 hour ago, Gloucester Saint said: Productivity wasn’t the main issue, it was lack of trained drivers which the previous government took a positive step on by lowering the driver qualification age, otherwise it was all underpinned by overtime working to deliver a core service. Which would have cost far more. No love for either ASLEF or RMT btw whatsoever. Hypo just hates train drivers and wants to see them replaced with computers, he may one day get his dream but the network us nothing like ready for such a change it is falling apart and crumbling around us. Wait till he realises the knock on impact of cancelling HS2 is unbelievable Delays on the west coast mainline in a few years as all the track needs to be replaced. The UK rail network is antiquated and desperately needs modernisation which isn’t going to happen without a government spending billions. Train drivers pay isn’t the problem with the railways! Edited September 19 by a1ex2001 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted September 19 Share Posted September 19 2 hours ago, Gloucester Saint said: Have Arsenal as his freebie but fade the others away would be my advice to him. He will be held to a different standard to a Tory leader, unreasonable though it is. Hasn't he held himself to a different standard by his own statements? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted September 19 Share Posted September 19 (edited) 57 minutes ago, a1ex2001 said: Hypo just hates train drivers and wants to see them replaced with computers, he may one day get his dream but the network us nothing like ready for such a change it is falling apart and crumbling around us. Wait till he realises the knock on impact of cancelling HS2 is unbelievable Delays on the west coast mainline in a few years as all the track needs to be replaced. The UK rail network is antiquated and desperately needs modernisation which isn’t going to happen without a government spending billions. Train drivers pay isn’t the problem with the railways! Thanks for telling me what I think but I'm perfectly capable of articulating what I believe without you making it up. Cheers. Edited September 19 by hypochondriac Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Duckhunter Posted September 19 Share Posted September 19 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pingpong Posted September 19 Share Posted September 19 If starmer can avoid: -encouraging people to go out and die in a pandemic -crashing the economy overnight -domestic violence, extra marital affairs, spaffing his junk up the wall and writing a book instead of attending emergency meetings -detaining, deporting and refusing legal rights to British citizens -calling a referendum to self harm every aspect of our economy to placate the racists in his party Then he will have safely achieved higher standards than the previous five prime ministers. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted September 19 Share Posted September 19 1 hour ago, pingpong said: If starmer can avoid: -encouraging people to go out and die in a pandemic -crashing the economy overnight -domestic violence, extra marital affairs, spaffing his junk up the wall and writing a book instead of attending emergency meetings -detaining, deporting and refusing legal rights to British citizens -calling a referendum to self harm every aspect of our economy to placate the racists in his party Then he will have safely achieved higher standards than the previous five prime ministers. Whatabout, Whatabout, whatabout 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pingpong Posted September 20 Share Posted September 20 17 hours ago, hypochondriac said: Whatabout, Whatabout, whatabout Not really, whataboutery implies some sort of equivalence, whereas I'm just showing the baseline measure. Being gifted some earrings for the missus is objectively not as bad as committing demicide, or being a perpetrator of domestic violence. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sadoldgit Posted September 20 Author Share Posted September 20 21 hours ago, Gloucester Saint said: Have Arsenal as his freebie but fade the others away would be my advice to him. He will be held to a different standard to a Tory leader, unreasonable though it is. Absolutely spot on. Those Tory mouthpieces and apologists who lost their sense of moral outrage over Tory snouts in the trough have now woken up and will crucify Starmer for everything they can. There are some very short memories around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sadoldgit Posted September 20 Author Share Posted September 20 (edited) Starmer, Rayner and Reeves have announced that they will no longer accept donated clothing. https://www.manxradio.com/news/uk-news/starmer-to-no-longer-accept-donations-to-pay-for-clothes-sky-news-understands/ Edited September 20 by sadoldgit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted September 20 Share Posted September 20 Shame no one donated them some new shoes 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Kraken Posted September 20 Share Posted September 20 (edited) Downing Street need to be giving Tony Gaziano a call pronto ffs. Edit. Not happening. Good move, finally. Should never have come to this. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cwyvpv1lzq6o Edited September 20 by The Kraken Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Holmes_and_Watson Posted September 20 Share Posted September 20 1 hour ago, The Kraken said: Downing Street need to be giving Tony Gaziano a call pronto ffs. Edit. Not happening. Good move, finally. Should never have come to this. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cwyvpv1lzq6o Troughers caught in trough declare that they will no longer trough from one small part of the trough again. Deflect to the tickets, by citing security. Deflect to clothes trotting out ministers who say our pm, partner and anyone else should look good. That it's something we should be paying for, but thankfully don't have to thanks to generous donations. Don't mention the concerts, the holidays, the various freebies, access and office support all provided by donors who I'm sure selflessly want nothing in return. Don't bring in all the others this applies to. Back in the expenses scandal and cash for questions scandal their greed was never in doubt. But no matter how they rig the rules to claim ridiculous things, it's never enough. It applies to all parties. This has been reported about Starmer for quite a while, and they did nothing to stop it continuing. It would have continued had it not reached this level of reporting. Not a shred of self awareness to do the right things. Perhaps they can donate all the clothing to help keep some pensioners warm this winter. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Kraken Posted September 20 Share Posted September 20 3 minutes ago, Holmes_and_Watson said: Troughers caught in trough declare that they will no longer trough from one small part of the trough again. Deflect to the tickets, by citing security. Deflect to clothes trotting out ministers who say our pm, partner and anyone else should look good. That it's something we should be paying for, but thankfully don't have to thanks to generous donations. Don't mention the concerts, the holidays, the various freebies, access and office support all provided by donors who I'm sure selflessly want nothing in return. Don't bring in all the others this applies to. Back in the expenses scandal and cash for questions scandal their greed was never in doubt. But no matter how they rig the rules to claim ridiculous things, it's never enough. It applies to all parties. This has been reported about Starmer for quite a while, and they did nothing to stop it continuing. It would have continued had it not reached this level of reporting. Not a shred of self awareness to do the right things. Perhaps they can donate all the clothing to help keep some pensioners warm this winter. It’s just such a massive own goal. The whole premise was set: the lot before you were corrupt incompetent cunts. But they’ve still got the press on their side. So, for your own good, be whiter than white and try to show you’re a bit different. I’m genuinely fucked off. I voted for Labour as I was fed up with sleaze and corruption from the previous lot, the Covid VIP lane was a genuine national scandal that got largely brushed over by the press. I naively thought Labour might cut this shit out even at the small levels just for the crap visuals of it all. I still trust this lot infinitely more than I did their predecessors, and I’ll judge them on how they perform against their election pledges. But this is such an unnecessary distraction, small potatoes grabbing of freebies from people who really don’t need handouts. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Holmes_and_Watson Posted September 20 Share Posted September 20 2 minutes ago, The Kraken said: It’s just such a massive own goal. The whole premise was set: the lot before you were corrupt incompetent cunts. But they’ve still got the press on their side. So, for your own good, be whiter than white and try to show you’re a bit different. I’m genuinely fucked off. I voted for Labour as I was fed up with sleaze and corruption from the previous lot, the Covid VIP lane was a genuine national scandal that got largely brushed over by the press. I naively thought Labour might cut this shit out even at the small levels just for the crap visuals of it all. I still trust this lot infinitely more than I did their predecessors, and I’ll judge them on how they perform against their election pledges. But this is such an unnecessary distraction, small potatoes grabbing of freebies from people who really don’t need handouts. You're just left with the impression that they can't help themselves. The pettiness of it doesn't really help. Any nickel and dime scam is enough. No fee to small to get a scam going. It says a lot on how they'd react in the bigger rip offs. Our interests first? Not a chance. Never mind the Big Book of Legit Scams already in place. Comparing yourself to... The gaping maw of the last lot's selfishness and greed, is not where you should be setting the bar. Nor should it be what they got away with from previous scandals. Having some common sense and decency would be a start. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whelk Posted September 21 Share Posted September 21 (edited) Don’t know why you are all getting so worked up. Hardly and indictment on their integrity. Clearly no obvious lobbying for favours on the back of it. Although whatever company is giving Rayner free clothes needs to employ better designers. Edited September 21 by whelk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weston Super Saint Posted September 21 Share Posted September 21 1 hour ago, whelk said: Don’t know why you are all getting so worked up. Hardly and indictment on their integrity. Clearly no obvious lobbying for favours on the back of it. Although whatever company is giving Rayner free clothes needs to employ better designers. Source? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted September 21 Share Posted September 21 11 hours ago, Holmes_and_Watson said: Troughers caught in trough declare that they will no longer trough from one small part of the trough again. Deflect to the tickets, by citing security. Deflect to clothes trotting out ministers who say our pm, partner and anyone else should look good. That it's something we should be paying for, but thankfully don't have to thanks to generous donations. Don't mention the concerts, the holidays, the various freebies, access and office support all provided by donors who I'm sure selflessly want nothing in return. Don't bring in all the others this applies to. Back in the expenses scandal and cash for questions scandal their greed was never in doubt. But no matter how they rig the rules to claim ridiculous things, it's never enough. It applies to all parties. This has been reported about Starmer for quite a while, and they did nothing to stop it continuing. It would have continued had it not reached this level of reporting. Not a shred of self awareness to do the right things. Perhaps they can donate all the clothing to help keep some pensioners warm this winter. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted September 21 Share Posted September 21 (edited) 1 hour ago, whelk said: Don’t know why you are all getting so worked up. Hardly and indictment on their integrity. Clearly no obvious lobbying for favours on the back of it. Although whatever company is giving Rayner free clothes needs to employ better designers. I don't actually care about it but I do find it quite amusing given how much they banged on about the dodgy tories accepting similar types of gifts. No one gives someone 70k for clothes just because and doesn't expect anything from that person down the line. The defence from some seems to be "well it is t as bad or as shameless as the tories" which isn't really any sort of defence at all. Edited September 21 by hypochondriac Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Holmes_and_Watson Posted September 21 Share Posted September 21 (edited) 2 hours ago, whelk said: Don’t know why you are all getting so worked up. Hardly and indictment on their integrity. Clearly no obvious lobbying for favours on the back of it. Although whatever company is giving Rayner free clothes needs to employ better designers. I do get the point on the tone whelk. For me it's a combination of the activity. their reaction to the push back and the other things they do combining to really annoy me. Just put on the radio. Someone from labour annoyed about the press talking about clothes. Last week it was "why, the taxpayer should be funding it all" slippery slope into giving away even more perks. This morning they are saying "well, they want to look smart." Both utterly missing the point. While also happily keeping it focused on clothes, rather than another look at all the other funding and gifts they get. A historically appalling bunch for lining their own (now paid for by someone else) pockets, on all sides. Rayner was talking about her working class credentials over the Ibiza trip. I did read one MSM source at the time saying that some of that trip had been paid for. While trying to find that. there's now a New York trip paid for. The push back over Ibiza is that " hard working MPs need to relax too" So relax, and get yourself clothes you like. But do it on your own money. Live to the values to talk about. Don't be just like all the grifters before you. Edited September 21 by Holmes_and_Watson 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whelk Posted September 21 Share Posted September 21 (edited) 23 minutes ago, hypochondriac said: I don't actually care about it but I do find it quite amusing given how much they banged on about the dodgy tories accepting similar types of gifts. No one gives someone 70k for clothes just because and doesn't expect anything from that person down the line. The defence from some seems to be "well it is t as bad or as shameless as the tories" which isn't really any sort of defence at all. What is amusing is the desperation of the press and the Tory run BBC and their delight. Don’t agree with Labour being so defensive but I couldn’t give flying fuck if Starmer goes on a freebie to Arsenal. Like the bs about 6pm on Friday he stops working, Still, it is clear why they do it as so many are keen lap it up. All feels so petty and fear we are going the way of US politics in partisan accusations and defences as it suits. Johnson went to Russian oligarch’s parties when Foreign Minister and did in unofficial capacity ie all off record and no FO staff and not a peep from the press. Little pricks like Chris Mason should be all over that sort of thing but no, his big stories are fucking chief of staff’s salary. Tedious tabloid stuff. Edited September 21 by whelk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted September 21 Share Posted September 21 (edited) 8 minutes ago, whelk said: What is amusing is the desperation of the press and the Tory run BBC and their delight. Don’t agree with Labour being so defensive but I couldn’t give flying fuck if Starmer goes on a freebie to Arsenal. Like the bs about 6pm on Friday he stops working, Still, it is clear why they do it as so many are keen lap it up. All feels so petty and fear we are going the way of US politics in partisan accusations and defences as it suits. Johnson went to Russian oligarch’s parties when Foreign Minister and did in unofficial capacity ie all off record and no FO staff and not a peep from the press. Little pricks like Chris Mason should be all over that sort of thing but know his big story is a fucking chief of staff’s salary. Tedious tabloid stuff. You're acting as if labour hadn't used the press at every opportunity during opposition to drone on about tory corruption, cronyism and lack on integrity - which is fair comment - and now people can point to examples of the same from labour so of course it's going to be highlighted. They were quite happy to moralise when the shoe was on the other foot and now you have the frankly laughable sight of someone like Jess Phillips who hasn't stopped going on about the tories going on telly to try to defend Starmer for exactly the type of thing she has been up in arms about. Like I said, Starmer is an intelligent chap and should have predicted how things like this would be received. The fact he didn't is the most baffling part of the whole thing. Even if you think it doesn't matter, it was really politically stupid. Edited September 21 by hypochondriac Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rallyboy Posted September 21 Share Posted September 21 It's not been great optics, taking freebies looks greedy, and triggers the casual observer to wheel out the lazy line, "they're all the same!" Hopefully Starmer's latest clarification will put a stop to it and let them get on with governing. In the meantime, Jenrick is up to his ears in it, again - the bloke stinks of corruption. Stories emerging now that he's taken personal donations from all kinds of companies that barely exist and look like fronts for money laundering. He has much explaining to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted September 21 Share Posted September 21 8 minutes ago, rallyboy said: It's not been great optics, taking freebies looks greedy, and triggers the casual observer to wheel out the lazy line, "they're all the same!" Hopefully Starmer's latest clarification will put a stop to it and let them get on with governing. In the meantime, Jenrick is up to his ears in it, again - the bloke stinks of corruption. Stories emerging now that he's taken personal donations from all kinds of companies that barely exist and look like fronts for money laundering. He has much explaining to do. Somehow I doubt the Mail, Express, or Telegraph will push him too hard on the matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted September 21 Share Posted September 21 1 minute ago, badgerx16 said: Somehow I doubt the Mail, Express, or Telegraph will push him too hard on the matter. I doubt a potential candidate of the opposition is anywhere near as newsworthy as the actual prime minister. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rallyboy Posted September 21 Share Posted September 21 25 minutes ago, hypochondriac said: I doubt a potential candidate of the opposition is anywhere near as newsworthy as the actual prime minister. They were for ten years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted September 21 Share Posted September 21 11 minutes ago, rallyboy said: They were for ten years. I heard a never ending amount about tory sleaze whilst they were in power. It's one big reason why they lost spectacularly a couple of months ago. What's your point? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now