shmmeee
Well-Known Member
It’s not true. Boris’ figure was something like £6m in gifts to Starmer’s £100k but because he’s not an MP any more he’s not counted.
There’s an article in the London Economic pointing out that Boris took more in freebies to decorate his flat than Starmer has taken since being leader of the Labour Party (2019) sonI don’t think that’s remotely true.
Is it a good look for Starmer that he’s taken as much as he has? No, absolutely not. It’s poor decision making. But there’s no need to exaggerate that he’s taken more than anyone else. Especially when you have someone like Boris in the mix.
But you would know that from education
Bear in mind, it wasn’t his flat.There’s an article in the London Economic pointing out that Boris took more in freebies to decorate his flat than Starmer has taken since being leader of the Labour Party (2019) so I don’t think that’s remotely true.
Is it a good look for Starmer that he’s taken as much as he has? No, absolutely not. It’s poor decision making. But there’s no need to exaggerate that he’s taken more than anyone else. Especially when you have someone like Boris in the mix.
The number 10 flat refurb that was gifted to Boris by a Lord Brownlow, final bill was reported at £200k. Following leaked invoices.It’s not true. Boris’ figure was something like £6m in gifts to Starmer’s £100k but because he’s not an MP any more he’s not counted.
Bound to happenThis thread needs to be renamed, nothing boring, everyday a new one.
How many millions has Dale Vince donated to the Labour Party?Subsidised by donors. Not tax payers.
What are you actually asking for?
Why shouldn’t a politician have campaign costs covered by donors? And why only small gifts from close people and not the millions from vested interests? And if you get rid of them do you want taxpayers to fund campaign costs instead?
It’s just all so random and illogical. Half the time it’s “the PM/LOTO shouldn’t have nice things” and the other it’s “oh corruption, but ignore a petrochemical firm pouring millions in cash in”. Just comes off as confected.
So?Bear in mind, it wasn’t his flat.
But it wasn’t his flat, it is public property,The number 10 flat refurb that was gifted to Boris by a Lord Brownlow, final bill was reported at £200k. Following leaked invoices.
So Boris got someone to pay for redecorating part of a public building. He didn’t profit personally as far as we know.
Genuinely. Is the problem that this guy is a donor or what? If it was his rich mate from school would that have been better? Lord Ali clearly is close friends with several Labour MPs and a long time supporter of the party. If he’s not allowed to donate literally no one is.
Be clear. What is the actual problem you’ve got and what would you like to happen? Because it comes off just as “politicians shouldn’t have rich friends”, which considering a PM who was a literal multi millionaire who no one commented on it seems a little false outrage.
Again. So? I thought your issue was people buying influence through donations to an MP. The Goldsmiths paid for Boris’s holidays, Carrie never paid for her wardrobe either, Boris got free hospitality at sporting events etc etc. Same as May, same as Cameron etc etc etc.So Boris got someone to pay for redecorating part of a public building. He didn’t profit personally as far as we know.
I'm not that bothered about if I'm honest, just find the all round hypocrisy (from media of various persuasions, Labour and Tories alike quite funny / depressing)
The number 10 flat refurb that was gifted to Boris by a Lord Brownlow, final bill was reported at £200k. Following leaked invoices.
Had Boris made the sort of pledges Starmer did?Again. So? I thought your issue was people buying influence through donations to an MP. The Goldsmiths paid for Boris’s holidays, Carrie never paid for her wardrobe either, Boris got free hospitality at sporting events etc etc. Same as May, same as Cameron etc etc etc.
He’s not doing anything none of the people he’s following either as leader of the opposition or as PM has done. The only difference this time is how it’s being reported. A good example is the wives wardrobe. When Carrie did it she was described as being canny, stark contrast to how Victoria Starmers wardrobe is being reported on. Or any of the things Starmer has personally accepted.
Had Boris made the sort of pledges Starmer did?
Mind you, there is one word that proves that Starmer is still in need of new specs.
Sausages.
Far more expensive even before you consider that stays there are indefinite where prison sentences are not. People don't get released until they are deemed safe, which is one of the reasons its slightly odd that people get outraged at people being 'let off' when they are sent to such a facility.I know the old style asylums rightly had a bad rep, but I wonder if something like that but with a more modern approach might help. I also wonder what the cost difference is and if prison is cheaper that’s why we’ve moved away from asylums.
Early intervention is 100% the key. My ex worked in early intervention and the results were incredible. So of course all funding was cut and the service shut down, or officially merged into another service. They then blamed the new service, which was under funded and totally unable to cope with demand, when people on waiting lists offended.Early intervention is the key in fact id go so far as to say it’s a silver bullet
Again. So?Had Boris made the sort of pledges Starmer did?
Mind you, there is one word that proves that Starmer is still in need of new specs.
Sausages.
They rank well in the CP index, 5th. We rank 23rd. Interestingly though Denmark rank first but there politicians earn pretty much the same as ours. Their ministers and PM earn more I think but it does tell you something about the mentality of their politicians vs ours.I wonder how people would take to the Singapore approach which is to pay market rate for good people but ban all hints of corruption and financial influence.
Their transport minister earns £800k/year.
Don’t take being ignored personally, happens to me all the time - albeit probably with good reason. It’s not much better on this forum.What has Starmer done wrong? The Tories didn’t follow the rules or changed them where they didn’t like them. You know about Starmer because he declares literally everything according to the rules.
There’s no accusation of corruption or rule breaking (aside from me keeping talking about YouTube and being ignored).
Far more expensive even before you consider that stays there are indefinite where prison sentences are not. People don't get released until they are deemed safe, which is one of the reasons its slightly odd that people get outraged at people being 'let off' when they are sent to such a facility.
Early intervention is 100% the key. My ex worked in early intervention and the results were incredible. So of course all funding was cut and the service shut down, or officially merged into another service. They then blamed the new service, which was under funded and totally unable to cope with demand, when people on waiting lists offended.
There was also a pilot project, I believe Coventry was one of the locations involved, where mental health specialists were embedded within police response teams so that those with mental health issues could be diverted to the appropriate service rather than end up being dealt with by the police & courts. The results were very positive so of course it was abandoned and never taken forward.
We know the solution to a lot of these problems, we just refuse to implement them.
Don’t take being ignored personally, happens to me all the time - albeit probably with good reason. It’s not much better on this forum.
I’d pay everyone in politics more (and at the top a lot more. £1m+/yr for the PM isn’t unreasonable), give them the same rules around accepting gifts your average Tesco employee has to sign up for, and ban second jobs and demand stocks are put into trust during your tenure.
Then give each party funding from taxes based on vote share.
There probably ought to be a maximum that can be spent as well.I’d pay everyone in politics more (and at the top a lot more. £1m+/yr for the PM isn’t unreasonable), give them the same rules around accepting gifts your average Tesco employee has to sign up for, and ban second jobs and demand stocks are put into trust during your tenure.
Then give each party funding from taxes based on vote share.
Wouldn't that funding approach potentially help to lock in a dominant party? Though admittedly hard to think of another approach.
Has he offered to recompense it yet or should we be looking at Jeremy for leader yet?Yeah it’s not perfect. Wouldn’t reflect mid term changes either really as locals are too hard to translate with only 1/3 each year.
But if you want money out of politics it’s the only way. We can’t pretend borrowing a flat might lead to undue influence but taking £10m off someone won’t.
I said earlier, I’m not convinced Starmer will see out a full term.Has he offered to recompense it yet or should we be looking at Jeremy for leader yet?
Apart from the last sentence I think that’s a decent alternative.I’d pay everyone in politics more (and at the top a lot more. £1m+/yr for the PM isn’t unreasonable), give them the same rules around accepting gifts your average Tesco employee has to sign up for, and ban second jobs and demand stocks are put into trust during your tenure.
Then give each party funding from taxes based on vote share.
Apart from the last sentence I think that’s a decent alternative.
Apart from the last sentence I think that’s a decent alternative.
How else do you fund campaigns?
I said earlier, I’m not convinced Starmer will see out a full term.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?