Lammy

RosiesMaw2

Oreo

It would make a difference to me! I had high hopes of this government and am disappointed so far.Yeah, true that there are important matters to discuss both here and abroad but how our political masters act is also important and I’d thought Starmer a bit different and one who wouldn’t accept loads of freebies, especially clothing for himself and his wife.Declaring something late is also very frowned upon in Parliament.
We’re all being asked to tighten our collective belts after all, so what message does this send? There was enough cronyism going on under Boris Johnson to last a lifetime so the last thing we want is more of the same behaviour.

I’m with Oreo on this. The Tories’ reputation for cronyism, sleaze and noses in the trough was what sickened me. I have no argument with people having money of their own but so many seemed to be out for what they could make and conveniently absent minded -remember “flipping” and duck houses?
Odd as it might seem, I thought Rishi was above that and while I don’t actually believe Starmer is fiddling any books this is a bad start.
As for worrying about Lady Vic looking like a “rag bag” - well if the rest of us can manage I’m sure she can too and of course she could .
I’m afraid Lammy just made it a whole lot worse by sounding as if the principle of an allowance for the PM’s wife who has no official status in this country after all was OK.

Well said Oreo and RosiesMaw2

I’d thought Starmer a bit different and one who wouldn’t accept loads of freebies, especially clothing for himself and his wife.Declaring something late is also very frowned upon in Parliament. We’re all being asked to tighten our collective belts after all, so what message does this send?

I cannot lie, I’m disappointed with Starmer and wife, but I’m still hoping for more positive things to come and less of the “sleaze” and “smears”, some of which he does deserve.

Nevertheless, 3 months to resolve any issue simply isn’t enough time and I’m still feeling positive and optimistic! 🙏🙏🙏🤞🤞🤞

eggplant

*Some of us are capable of thinking about more than one topic at a time*

Not very kind?

I feel worried but its not about wallpaper, glasses, donkeys, trouser suits or the Royal Family.

Has anyone said they're worried about this?

However, we mustn't let them all forget the expenses scandals of a few years ago although I'm sure Sir Keir is very mindful of that and the criticism levelled at Boris Johnson and his wallpaper.

Incidentally, although this does not worry me in the slightest, does anyone know if the wallpaper has been painted over yet?
Whitewashed?

biglouis

*I’d thought Starmer a bit different and one who wouldn’t accept loads of freebies, especially clothing for himself and his wife.Declaring something late is also very frowned upon in Parliament. We’re all being asked to tighten our collective belts after all, so what message does this send?*

We needn't worry about Rachel Reeves - I'm sure that's my raincoat which I sent to the charity shop.

Wish I'd kept it now, they seem to have come back into fashion.

I shall fret about that all day now.

It is time this gifting nonsense was stopped. No politician and his spouse should be receiving donations for clothing, home decor, food or holidays. We like to think that politics in the UK is free from bribery and corruption but accepting "gifts" must surely leave the recipient with an obligation to the giver. The PM has left himself wide open to the same criticism that was rightly put to Johnson. He will find that voters won't give him the benefit of the doubt that they gave the cheeky chappy with the rumpled look . Starmer has to be above reproach on the freebies or anything good he achieves will be lost in media trivia.

eazybee

The things that really matter are the integrity of the present Prime Minister, as the leader of the party that came to power through endless personal attacks on May, Boris, Truss and Sunak; every little detail magnified and repeated relentlessly.

Sturmer has attempted to take the high moral ground, and as such needs to show he is above reproach. He clearly is not.
Taking away fuel allowance from pensioners while accepting money to procure expensive clothes and accessories for him and his wife is rank hypocrisy.

👏👏👏👏👏

Does the Starmers' new wardrobe expose them as hypocrites?

Yes
95%
6372 votes

No
3%
225 votes

Not sure
1%
95 votes

6692 votes in total. Oh dear.

Can't find any source for that poll?

But I do think it's now time to end the centuries old habit of gifting to politicians - lessons learnt about how the public feel just as they did under Johnson although the scale considerably different.

I agree on both counts WWM.

I think that MPs should get at least the standing energy charge paid on their London homes, but maybe cabinet ministers should not get more than travel and housing expenses.

The reason I say that is that keeping up a home in London is essential for a cabinet minister, and if there is no help for them to do so people from less well-off backgrounds who have to travel long distances and maintain a base in their constituencies as well as one near Westminster will be deterred from becoming MPs. This will mean that more remote areas of the country might only get representation from those who can afford to take the hit, rather than from the people they want.

Cabinet ministers are paid more than MPs, but of course they have more responsibility, so clawing back the increase in their salary by cutting allowances wouldn't be fair, so maybe pay them a bit more from the public purse so there is no need for gifts of any kind, and put a stop to all of it.

It is naive to say that what they wear doesn't matter - look at the hoo haa over ARs trouser suit!

Lammys defence on tv yesterday was that politicians in other countries got a clothing allowance. Well, pensioners in other countries get more than UK pensioners do - so when can we expect an increase?

Apologies Wyllow I forgot to quote my source.
It was the Daily Mail this morning.

FriedGreenTomatoes2

Lammys defence on tv yesterday was that politicians in other countries got a clothing allowance. Well, pensioners in other countries get more than UK pensioners do - so when can we expect an increase?

Probably when we increase the amount we pay in. It depends which other countries you look at, too. In much of the world you get nothing if you pay nothing in. State pensions don't exist everywhere, and even if they do they are either means-tested or based entirely on contributions. People are either supported by family or work till they drop.

Well said eazybee.

FriedGreenTomatoes2

Apologies Wyllow I forgot to quote my source.
It was the Daily Mail this morning.

Well anything the Daily Mail prints must be correct!!!

I’m wondering if any decoration at No10 has been done since Carrie’s splurge, Truss wasnt there long enough, did Mrs Sunak make changes.

I think the gifts need to be stopped. But the problem would then be, should these 2nd "jobs" be stopped too, because let's face it, they appear to bring in money for doing practically nothing?

I agree about second jobs. Farage is earning big bucks from flying off to America.
As for that poll, the DM readers would say that wouldn't they. No one is arguing that it is right to accept gifts. It has to stop.

A poll of DM readers is not exactly an unbiased sample of the UK population.

Lammy ought to be focussing on his job, not wasting time on trivial issues.

David49

I’m wondering if any decoration at No10 has been done since Carrie’s splurge, Truss wasnt there long enough, did Mrs Sunak make changes.

I’m pretty sure that the Sunaks stayed in No.11, which had been decorated whilst he was chancellor. I don’t blame them at all! Maybe Jeremy Hunt redecorated No10, but no doubt there will be some who criticise Starmer if he does redecorate from his annual allowance, although I don’t imagine gold flocked wallpaper to be his taste, or Jeremy Hunt’s for that matter. It certainly wouldn’t be mine.

I think Lammy is getting rather a raw deal here. He was sent out, I assume by Starmer or Starmer's people, to defend the indefensible.

I'd be surprised if Clacton has seen much of Farage as he lines his pockets substantially elsewhere including more than a bob or two on GB news. If all our MP's had regular TV/media paid slots we'd consider it massively completely out of order - just imagine.

I'm for the "second jobs" only when it is to keep up professional minimum obligations

I rather thought it might be the DM, Grantanow.

In terms of what Lammy is doing, he's pretty busy with Foreign Affairs: this thread is based on the media shenanigans around one part of one interview that GN has taken up.

Ilovecheese

I think Lammy is getting rather a raw deal here. He was sent out, I assume by Starmer or Starmer's people, to defend the indefensible.

Or caught up in it because it was his "turn" at the weekend media interviews and could have been any Labour minister.

Wyllow3

Ilovecheese

I think Lammy is getting rather a raw deal here. He was sent out, I assume by Starmer or Starmer's people, to defend the indefensible.

Or caught up in it because it was his "turn" at the weekend media interviews and could have been any Labour minister.

Yes, that seems the most likely explanation to me.

Parsley3

I agree about second jobs. Farage is earning big bucks from flying off to America.
As for that poll, the DM readers would say that wouldn't they. No one is arguing that it is right to accept gifts. It has to stop.

If you elect an MP you expect them to spend some time in Parliament and on constituency duties, not swanning off around the world or spending time on lucrative business which has nothing to do with the primary job..

Unless, of course, they are on official duties ie like the PM or Foreign Minister or anyone on behalf of Government business overseas.