Am I alone in finding this so tawdry?

MaizieD

Lisaangel10

FriedGreenTomatoes2

I see the nurses have just rejected the offered 5.5% pay increase. It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

Of course they’ll get it. Corbyn caved in to train drivers and doctors so nurses want it too.

Corbyn caved in to train drivers and doctors did he?

Interesting....

Senior moment, so sorry! 🤭 obviously I meant Starmer.

GrannyGravy13

I have seen GN condemnation of all MPs who take donor gifts whatever party they belong to.

They nearly all do take donations and gifts, so condemning one is condemning all who do the same in my book. I think Kemi Badenoch was wise today to say she’d done it, because at least that way she’s on the front foot.

FriedGreenTomatoes2

I see the nurses have just rejected the offered 5.5% pay increase. It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

Strange how, not long ago people were on their doorsteps clapping for nurses who were risking their lives to save us and now they’re resenting the fact that they want to be paid a decent wage.

Well of course the nurses are going to reject 5.5 percent when doctors were awarded 22 percent. It is not that difficult to understand.

MayBee70

FriedGreenTomatoes2

I see the nurses have just rejected the offered 5.5% pay increase. It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

Strange how, not long ago people were on their doorsteps clapping for nurses who were risking their lives to save us and now they’re resenting the fact that they want to be paid a decent wage.

👏👏👏

eggplant

*Boris is looking like an amateur next to this lot*

What Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson did is in a completely different league. He destroyed hope and decency.

Perhaps Trump and Nigel will come to the recue.

Hope so

MissAdventure

I've read regarding the cost of Starmers freebies is still £12000 less than Johnsons living room do over.

There is time yet

MissAdventure
I've read regarding the cost of Starmers freebies is still £12000 less than Johnsons living room do over.

But does it being less make it more acceptable to do it?

Johnson left the wallpaper behind at no 10 Downing Street. Starmer is physically wearing his gifts on his own back. It’s said Sunak paid out of his own pocket for no 10 to be redecorated. If he had, it makes a point doesn’t it?

You’ve confused the flats ronib. Boris Johnson lived in Number 11, Sunak chose to live in Number 10, which he had previously lived in when he was Chancellor. He paid himself for new soft furnishings when he became PM, for which, good on him. I can’t find it in the public domain whether the annual parliamentary redecoration allowances were also spent or not, but I imagine he had already upgraded No. 10 as Chancellor, and was only out of it during Liz Truss’ short tenure when Kwasi Kwarteng moved in. I assume the Johnson horrors at No. 11 were removed under Liz Truss because the wallpaper was already peeling,, with Jeremy Hunt completing the job (not personally I would guess!).

There’s a bigger problem with Downing Street apparently, as it requires a structural refurbishment, which successive PMs have put off, preferring to paper over the cracks.

Niche interest, here’s the article about the need for major refurbishment.
www.houseandgarden.co.uk/gallery/history-10-downing-street

Casdon okay I confused the flats. But the principle remains - Sunak seems to have been the only prime minister to pay for refurbishing no 11 at his own expense. Look where that got him. The electorate chose Starmer who will never pay out of his own pocket for his own essentials it would seem. Wonder what next will be revealed?

I wouldn’t be counting my chickens about any of them from any party ronib. Accepting gifts and donations is allowed within the rules, they aren’t doing anything they aren’t permitted to do, so it’s a non issue at the end of the day whatever we may feel personally about the morality of it. Should the rules be changed?

Yes Casdon the rules should be changed so that the prime minister is not the person to initiate breaches in the ministerial code. Secondly the ministerial code should have the force of law. Much stronger anti corruption would be a good start in government.

Why hasn’t it beeen done years ago ronib, in your opinion?

Casdon good question. Maybe something to do with power structures? Since the prime minister and government ministers seem to benefit from the loose arrangement in place, this group won’t want to change it. It’s not to their advantage.

I don’t know ronib. The donations to the Labour politicians were made before they became ministers, so restricting removal of gifts and donations to ministers wouldn’t resolve what people now see as wrong. The only way I can see forward is to either change the permissions, so that for example no MPs can accept certain categories of gifts or donations, or to cease allowing them altogether - but it would have to be for all MPs.

Why is it only now it's become an issue?

It's always been the case that these people should be well able to fund their hobbies, interests, pants, and refurbishments.

Casdon civil servants have very strict about gifts and I don’t see why serving politicians shouldn’t adhere to the same rules once in office.
Separate conditions need to be set for election expenses- which I believe do exist?
De

Very strict rules

I was a public servant too, and yes, you’re right ronib, no personal or departmental gifts, hospitality for events was only sponsored under very strict guidelines.managed funds were where donations went, all expenditure had to be approved.

You’re right Miss A, I think it’s all always been smoke and mirrors as to which expenses are allowed under the rules for politicians (almost anything seems to be allowed), and what the public think is acceptable, which depends on the prevailing mood of the media. I don’t understand why there would be a differentiation between ministers and other MPs - if that was acceptable, Keir Starmer could have had 100 pairs of glasses donated for the election campaign whilst leader of the opposition and nobody would care now, but they do. One thing is for sure, there are no easy answers.

Is it fair to prevent MPs from accepting gifts from friends? They already have huge disruption to their lives. Surely the issue is if donations are being used to buy influence and that is very difficult to prove or disprove. There's already been rather a lot of "bad smells" around Jenrick but so far nothing that has prevented him being the front runner to become leader of the opposition. I think that demonstrates something quite key to this discussion. He's received nearly £200k in donations but with one exception there's no description of what the money is being used for. I'm not suggesting he's done anything wrong but there was "concern" over some of his decisions when he was housing secretary that were linked to donors.

When I worked for the council as a carer, we often ended up losing out on gifts that grateful families made, because of it all needing to be fair and above board, with nobody benefitting more from it.

I expect that's why the office staff ate our tins of sweets at Christmas...

I thought donations, any size, were made to the Party branches and used for party needs, such as office equipment, extra staff, travel. additional heating in ramshackle accommodation, etc, not personal possessions. The system has clearly been abused as were MPs expenses.

The system hasn’t been abused though eazybee, because the system has always permitted personal gifts and donations as long as they are declared, and the vast majority of MPs have made use of the system over the years. Apart from the late declaration by Keir Starmer, nothing has been done outside the rules. What we’re trying to debate here are whether the rules are acceptable to us as voters, and if not how would we change them, what do you think regarding that?