Sick of Starmer relentlessly using the words"difficult " & "painful"

Rosie51

Wyllow3 did you want to make a comparison between Rishi Sunak while PM supporting his football team from the ordinary stands while Starmer considers he needs the 'safety' of being in a gifted hospitality box? I voted for Labour and really hoped they wouldn't be so grasping and greedy as too many of the Conservatives. He obviously doesn't find it difficult to accept freebies. Weren't we led to believe the greed for freebies was going to be no longer once Labour were elected?

We were, but it was obviously a hollow promise. Another lot with their snouts in the trough. 🙄

I think the Swedish - and Norwegian - national psyche is rather different to ours.

Many will disagree, but I do believe we are still a nation fundamentally divided by class which affects obviously the way we think about those holding positions of power, etc.

However, it would also be wrong to suggest that Sweden is a classless society. My partner is Swedish and he says it does exist, but it's more 'subtle' - less obvious - and it's mostly the older generation who 'believe' in the class system.

Thanks Dickens for an interesting and enlightening post.
I wonder what makes their MPs and officials not need the official cars, security etc that ours deem essential? We're often encouraged to look to the Scandinavian model, I'll support adoption of their attitude of all being equal in a heartbeat.

No perks for Swedish MPs

Odd as it may sound to the many representatives of the people elsewhere, Sweden does not offer luxury or privileges to its politicians. Without official cars or private drivers, Swedish ministers and MPs travel in crowded buses and trains, just like the citizens they represent.

This is a nation that treats its government officials and political representatives as ordinary citizens. A country without “excellencies” and other formal titles of address. A society that abolished the use of formal pronouns in the 1960s, and where everyone is called simply “you”. Because, according to the Swedish system of values, nobody is above anybody else. Not even politicians, who should live in conditions similar to the reality of the people who elect them.

... and here's the killer...

In the 1990s. The deputy prime minister, Mona Sahlin, bought a bar of chocolate, nappies and some other personal items with a government credit card, and paid dearly for it: she lost her job. The scandal went down in the annals of Swedish politics as the Toblerone Case.

... I was working in bordering Norway at the time - the Toblerone Case made headline news there, too.

The article was written by one Claudia Wallin, an independent journalist and was written in 2019. Whether things have changed since, I don't know.

But, it's interesting.

So yes, it should apply to all MP's, but currently it would need a change in the IPSA rules to prevent gifts across the board.
Well since IPSA members are recommended for appointment by the speaker of the HOC, it’s not hard to see why they allow / support pay rises, gifts etc.
As a school governor, I have to declare any vested interest in subjects on the agenda.

You can see why I was one of the 40% who voted for a minor party or an independent candidate. It's like meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

Oreo

Well, no more clothes freebies it seems, although the clothes gifts weren’t declared as such in Parliament just as ‘donations to help them’. In which case the money donations will still roll in so how will we know they aren’t spent on clothes?🧐

Well, until personal gifts are banned altogether for MP's we won't know for any MP if they spend them on clothes unless specified?

(It is relevant Maizie! Starmer is right to say the cost of security to the tax payer if he sat in the normal stands would be unacceptable, but in the current climate where the public now view gifts differently its an issue)

Well, no more clothes freebies it seems, although the clothes gifts weren’t declared as such in Parliament just as ‘donations to help them’. In which case the money donations will still roll in so how will we know they aren’t spent on clothes?🧐

Mt61

Casdon

It’s the people who deny that this country is in a terrible state, with diminished public services, increased poverty, a reduced role in Europe and on the world stage as a result of years of misrule who are in denial eazybee. At least people who voted Labour did so with the hope of a better future for the population as a whole.

Ahh but a lot are now wishing they hadn’t voted for labour- he has gone back on a lot of what he said & promised in his campaign

Apart from the WFA issue (which wasn't actually mentioned the in Labour Campaign, it was something said in 2022)

Fact check
www.reuters.com/fact-check/no-evidence-rayner-promised-maintain-winter-fuel-payment-july-2024-2024-09-18/

What has Starmer gone back on promised in the election campaign, M61

twiglet77

The state pension will go up next April due to the triple lock, not because the Labour Party have any concept of social conscience.

I too am only just over the threshold to qualify for Pension Credit. Aren’t I lucky to be old enough for a bus pass, and lucky to live alone so my council tax is only 75% of that paid by a couple (and it’s still a quarter of my income each month).

Genuinely lucky, though, in innumerable ways that no government can influence, and I never forget that.

Ahh but for how long before they get rid of the free bus pass & 75% CT?

Mollygo

^FWIW it appears that Sunak didn't watch from the 'ordinary' stands but from the Directors' section.^
The time to complain about that was then.
This is now.
Back then Starmer said Sunak was wrong to plan to remove the WFA.
Now Starmer thinks it’s the right thing to do.
Actually, if he thinks it would cost the taxpayers too much for his security, he could have said he would watch it on TV because adding to the tax burden for his own enjoyment would be unfair.

I wasn't complaining about it. In this day and age I wouldn't expect any PM to be able to come and go as they pleased without any consideration of the security risk. I was just pointing out that 'Sunak in the stands' wasn't quite the killer argument that some posters seemed to think it was.

Casdon

It’s the people who deny that this country is in a terrible state, with diminished public services, increased poverty, a reduced role in Europe and on the world stage as a result of years of misrule who are in denial eazybee. At least people who voted Labour did so with the hope of a better future for the population as a whole.

Ahh but a lot are now wishing they hadn’t voted for labour- he has gone back on a lot of what he said & promised in his campaign

I think our current PM is finding it both difficult and painful to be in the top job, as opposed the breeze of being leader of the opposition.

Indeed. All politicians.

If "then and now" is relevant to what politicians have said in the past, compared with the present, so are past gifts, because it gives a picture of what has been regarded as acceptable and what is not.

The amount of both tax payers and private gifts Sunak accepted for private jets and helicopters runs into the hundreds of thousands.

So yes, it should apply to all MP's, but currently it would need a change in the IPSA rules to prevent gifts across the board.

Sidetrack-sorry.
Nurses are not allowed to accept gifts from patients. Teachers are criticised for accepting gifts from parents.
Why shouldn’t that apply to politicians?

FWIW it appears that Sunak didn't watch from the 'ordinary' stands but from the Directors' section.
The time to complain about that was then.
This is now.
Back then Starmer said Sunak was wrong to plan to remove the WFA.
Now Starmer thinks it’s the right thing to do.
Actually, if he thinks it would cost the taxpayers too much for his security, he could have said he would watch it on TV because adding to the tax burden for his own enjoyment would be unfair.

Oreo

Because no Conservative could possibly enjoy the beautiful game? How peculiar.

Rosie51 I echo what you say.

It's just not cricket, my dear 😁

FWIW it appears that Sunak didn't watch from the 'ordinary' stands but from the Directors' section.

I suspect the cost of security would have been extortionate had he mingled with the ordinary fans.

Mollygo

From what I know of Kier Starmer, he’d like to be in a gifted seat, wearing gifted clothes.

Well said.

From what I know of Winchester College, which Rishi attended,
It is famous for its football
The college has several football pitches and most boys are genuinely interested in the game
Coaches from Saints train the pupils
The boys have a strong connection with the club and often attend matches and mpst are genuine fans

Mollygo 😂🤣😂

From what I know of Kier Starmer, he’d like to be in a gifted seat, wearing gifted clothes.

MayBee70 From what I know of Keir he would rather be in the stands because that’s where he has always supported his team. I wonder just how many times Sunak went to see ‘his’ team play and how much of a genuine football fan he actually is. I can't give exact numbers but given he was born in Southampton and attended games from a young age with his dad I'd imagine quite a few. He's supported them through relegation and promotion back to the Premier division, so I'm guessing a genuine football fan? If Rishi Sunak (who I've never supported) can watch from the stands when PM why can't Keir Starmer? What say you MayBee is that enough to make him a genuine football fan in your opinion?

Because no Conservative could possibly enjoy the beautiful game? How peculiar.

Rosie51 I echo what you say.