Lammy

Doodledog

But KS declared the gifts - that’s the bit that’s a smear - it is being suggested that he is hypocritical because he was down on the Tories for not declaring things like wallpaper etc, when that’s not what happened.

You should listen to some of the you tube views of what Starmer said about Boris and the wallpaper. Recorded for posterity. According to Sunday Times " the PM approached Parliamentary authorities on Tuesday last to make a " late declaration." Why oh why are Labour supporters defending a hypocrite.

That's your judgement. I'll defend him when I think to appropriate and criticise him - as I do, and others do - if I think his policy/actions are wrong. It's your judgement and an adopted social media meme that he is a hypocrite, not a "fact".

I have been told the golden wallpaper never existed. No-one ever admitted to seeing it, although many were asked, and I cannot believe no-one was ever able to take a picture and post it on social media. One person I know who worked in Number 10 during the debacle said it was a made-up story, and another who worked there intermittently said it was never' hung' if indeed chosen.
That is only hearsay so I honestly do not know, but I do feel someone,somewhere would have taken a picture if the papered walls ever existed.

eazybee

I have been told the golden wallpaper never existed. No-one ever admitted to seeing it, although many were asked, and I cannot believe no-one was ever able to take a picture and post it on social media. One person I know who worked in Number 10 during the debacle said it was a made-up story, and another who worked there intermittently said it was never' hung' if indeed chosen.
That is only hearsay so I honestly do not know, but I do feel someone,somewhere would have taken a picture if the papered walls ever existed.

The designer said it was in fact yellow, not gold.
The refurbishment did exceed the budget allowed.

We had green and gold wallpaper in our sitting room years ago (not gold leaf!) and then decided we didn't like it later and tried to paint over it.

We found it's not easy to paint over gold.

Chancellor of the Exchequer Jeremy Hunt later told LBC that the paper had been painted over since Johnson left Downing Street. Speaking to Andrew Marr, Hunt said: ‘It's gone! It wasn't me – it was removed before I went – but I must admit when I went in, out of curiosity, I went and had a look and it had been painted over.’

This government seems to need such a lot of protection and defence from its supporters.
Don’t accept gifts, but pay them more.
Is it really true that Starmer’s 2 salaries means he couldn’t afford clothes unless a party supporter payed for them in return for access to number 20?
Let them have second jobs-but let them keep their expenses.

Wyllow3

That's your judgement. I'll defend him when I think to appropriate and criticise him - as I do, and others do - if I think his policy/actions are wrong. It's your judgement and an adopted social media meme that he is a hypocrite, not a "fact".

There are four defined characteristics of hypocrisy

Pretence
Blame
Inconsistency
Complacency

In this case the PM is inconsistent in his attitude to gifts from party donors

If it was wrong for previous PM’s to accept gifts which he stated in the H of P regarding wallpaper gate & holidays for PM Johnson then it is wrong for him to accept clothes and spectacles, hypocritical…

eazybee

I have been told the golden wallpaper never existed. No-one ever admitted to seeing it, although many were asked, and I cannot believe no-one was ever able to take a picture and post it on social media. One person I know who worked in Number 10 during the debacle said it was a made-up story, and another who worked there intermittently said it was never' hung' if indeed chosen.
That is only hearsay so I honestly do not know, but I do feel someone,somewhere would have taken a picture if the papered walls ever existed.

Jeremy Hunt said it existed, I would class him as a reliable source?
www.spectator.co.uk/article/jeremy-hunt-reveals-the-truth-about-boriss-gold-wallpaper/

Well done for the crafty deflection away from the original comment

As I said, I am sure someone would have taken a picture of the paper before it was painted over. It is a story that won't go away; neither will the Empress's new clothes.

Message deleted by Gransnet. Here's a link to our Talk guidelines.

Oreo

Casdon

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.

I don’t think many people are interested in/want to/understand/have formed political opinions/care/grasp or whatever words you choose, to discuss the more important issues which will affect our daily lives. It’s less taxing on the brain and more fun to discuss the people than the issues, and to let personal antipathy override reason. We’re all guilty to a greater or lesser extent.

What patronising guff spouted to your fellow GN members.
All to distract from the subject as you feel uncomfortable with saying anything critical of Starmer.

We all have our moments Oreo.

Patronising moments? You don’t have to give in to it.

We are both who we are, aren’t we though? I included myself in what I said because I’m as easily sucked in to threads about trivia as anybody else is.

This thread isn’t about trivia, it’s about worries that Starmer may be giving in to the freebie culture and sleaze that a lot of us found repugnant in the last Conservative government.Am hoping this will be the last of it if KS has any sense.

Oreo

This thread isn’t about trivia, it’s about worries that Starmer may be giving in to the freebie culture and sleaze that a lot of us found repugnant in the last Conservative government.Am hoping this will be the last of it if KS has any sense.

👏👏👏

I realise that I will be accused of 'defending' him, not that he needs my support , but I genuinely see this as someone getting used to the job - most of us will make mistakes in our first year of a new job, until we settle in and learn the ropes. I certainly have.

As soon as he realised he needed to declare the money he did - it's not as though he's been doing nothing since July, is it?

This thread is about the OP’s take on David Lammy defending Starmer Oreo. That’s not what people are talking about I know, but look at the title and the original post. The post is disingenuous, aimed at getting people to have a go at somebody whose only crime was to defend his boss. I stand by what I said.

Wyllow3

That's your judgement. I'll defend him when I think to appropriate and criticise him - as I do, and others do - if I think his policy/actions are wrong. It's your judgement and an adopted social media meme that he is a hypocrite, not a "fact".

👏👏👏

Oreo

This thread isn’t about trivia, it’s about worries that Starmer may be giving in to the freebie culture and sleaze that a lot of us found repugnant in the last Conservative government.Am hoping this will be the last of it if KS has any sense.

I too hope this is the first and last of it.

I still have faith in the Labour Party, I’m not happy with some of Starmer’s actions, nor Reeves, BUT I am prepared to give them all a proper chance!

Yes, I think Lammy was telling the truth. It's a storm in a teacup. I agree that KS has to be like Caesar's wife when it comes to any hint of cronyism, and I believe that he is a decent and honest man who will do his best to root out any corruption. He's not going to get it right every time.

What I think the government is doing really badly is getting the Comms right. These days, when there is 24 hour news, and people picking up on every tiny thing, it is vital that political parties have someone 'controlling the narrative' as the saying goes. If they have anyone in that role, it's time they were replaced. The WFP debacle was handled very badly, as was the release of prisoners. Both could have been presented very differently, particularly as the LP Comms people will be very aware that the vast majority of the press and media companies are 'unsupportive' (understatement).

I think both were the right thing to do, but the WFP cut should have been announced in the budget, with a phased reduction, so that those just above the PC threshold got a percentage of it, decreasing until it stopped, and anything that the budget holds in mitigation should have been announced at the same time.

Sunak was responsible for the prison crisis. That should have been spelt out more obviously, and information about the types of prisoner and how much of their sentences were outstanding should have been given. There will be dangerous criminals released every day, but as they've served their sentence they have to be set free. All that makes the press is that people have come out of jail, and details of their crime are given, but not that they only had 3 more months (or whatever) to serve.

I'm in no way suggesting that things should be covered up or twisted, but that there should be a more upbeat version of events fed to the media, so that the constant assaults on everything the government does can be countered.

The truth depends on who you are supporting. Certainly dressing it up in a different format might have made announcements more acceptable, but if any other party did that dressing up, the flood of criticism would be just as it is now.

No it wouldn't. I am not (and I explicitly said I wasn't) suggesting 'dressing up', but making a case, which is a very different thing.

When people are waiting to pounce on every word, spin it as failure and hypocrisy it is vital that their case is made.

Thanks Doodledog, as ever to the point. I found myself wondering who/where Starmer’s Alistair Campbell is. As you reminded us, Starmer has had a heavy vase load since the election. The government inherited a pigs ear on election. Those of us who follow politics must have known it wasn’t going to be easy or quick to even begin the process of re-building. It’s telling that this fact is yet to be acknowledged in the constant criticisms
As for Mrs Starmer’s clothes and related issues, acknowledged and sorted

Casdon

This thread is about the OP’s take on David Lammy defending Starmer Oreo. That’s not what people are talking about I know, but look at the title and the original post. The post is disingenuous, aimed at getting people to have a go at somebody whose only crime was to defend his boss. I stand by what I said.

And I stand by what I said too.
Lammy had the uncomfortable job of defending the indefensible.Threads wander, but the subject matter is the same really, a donor giving designer clothes to a millionaire PM and wife. I don’t give any PM or Chancellor leeway to settle in and learn the ropes, these are politicians who have been in Opposition and know the ropes inside out.
I don’t expect KS to sort out the NHS or the migrant boats crisis in a heartbeat but I do expect him to act with honour and not accept highly expensive gifts from donors , especially at a time when the more vulnerable in society are being told it’s hard cheese for them but soft delicious cheeses for themselves.

Hypocrisy is defending the indefensible by the party you support and condemning it in the party you don’t support.
E.g. supporting Starmer for -challenging Sunak about the wrongness of cutting WFA and condemning the Tory party for considering doing that
Starmer doing exactly that and being supported.