RayC

There was this event for starters. I'm sure that there are plenty of others. https://www.reformparty.uk/clacton_action_day_friday_21st_june

Err ... During the General Election campaign.

And yet Farage doesn't appear to have any qualms about meeting and greeting the public while campaigning up and down the country.

No doubt you will point them out when (or if) they come to light.

Indeed. But equally there is no reason why that should exclude highlighting the coincidences which were visible in some of the previous government's business dealings.

The newspapers aren't letting this go, so if any rules were broken they will almost certainly be revealed. In the meantime, I'd suggest that 'innocent until proven guilty' should be the maxim rather than the reverse, which currently seems to be the case. Raynor claims that she has been fully transparent https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ce8vmv1mpggo

That's effectively what we have at present. The independent Committee on Standards in Public Life advises the Prime Minister on arrangements for upholding ethical standards of conduct across public life in England. However, this committee has no regulatory powers and cannot investigate individual complaints. Moreover, it reports to the Parliamentary Ethics Committee, which consists of MPs nominated by their fellow MPs. A clear case of a potential conflict of interests. Imo the powers of the independent Committee on Standards in Public Life should be widened to those of a regulator and include investigation. If this were to happen, there would probably be no need for the Parliamentary Ethics Committee and it could be disbanded.

What about the other freebies? Starmer declared them. What donations and gifts did Reeves and Raynor forget to declare? I wouldn't argue with the proposition that this whole episode is unseemly and seedy, but the unspoken implication that it involves dishonesty and corruption is, to date, unproven.

President Putin commented that he has been planning for an invasion in 16 years time and concluded that he needed more cannon fodder. (Note: He didn't really say that)

Starmer didn't declare the cost of a personal shopper and clothes for his wife worth £5k. It's a bit desperate to imply that his claim to have "forgot" (your quotes) is any more than that: It probably was just an oversight. It shouldn't have happened, but it's deserving of a slap on the wrist rather than being hung, drawn and quartered. An independent ethics committee to monitor political donations and gifts isn't a bad idea.

Deleted.

Apart from the startling revelation that American diplomats discuss diplomatic affairs, this conversation proves what exactly?

Then we had best ban any donations and gifts to political parties and MPs to avoid a possible conflict of interests.

Putin has his fellow countrymen's blood on his hands

There has not been any great enthusiasm for Labour since Starmer became leader, and he probably didn't have any great bedrock of support amongst the 3 groups you mention. If I were Starmer I'd also feel absolutely buoyed by the news that I no longer had the support of Owen Jones and Novaro. The overwhelming evidence to date suggests that Starmer is far from weak; in fact, the exact opposite. He can justifiably be accused of being authoritarian. Incompetent? I'd suggest that after less than 3 months in office, it's too early to jump to that conclusion. Hypocritical? Certainly looks like it. A liar? Well Starmer may have lied prior to becoming PM, but what lies have this Labour government told since taking office? Wrt how long Labour MPs will put us with Starmer - assuming no Johnson-like scandals occur - I'd suggest that it will be until at least 2028, unless these MPs see their future in the political wilderness. As I have said previously, unless there is some bombshell of the "Starmer eats babies" type, it is wishful thinking on the part of some, if they think that Starmer will be ousted as PM anytime soon.

So based on a piece of anti-Labour rhetoric from Conservative Central Office's propaganda unit (aka The Daily Telegraph), the Labour Party which has been in power for 3 months, has a parliamentary majority of 174 and does not need to call an election until 2029, is under pressure and is about to ditch its' leader. Sound reasoning or wishful thinking on the part of the anti-Labour lobby?

He may be unfit for political office but not because of his 'colourful' past. You have to question the sanity of anyone who states that, "I have lived in Merthyr all my life; and I can honestly say that I wouldn’t want to live anywhere else"😁

It says that the proposed measure would be 'consensual and reversible'

That's the problem with DIY fixes. Should've gone to a vet😉

You've misunderstood the gist of the article, which is about Meloni's ability to engage with politicians of all (most?) political persuasions. Still, no surprise there as you appear to view everything as 'black and white', and your default position is confrontational.

Imo that's a pretty fair summary. And TBF to Italy, the rate at which they replace governments has slowed. In the '70s and '80s they appeared to install a new government every 1.11 months!😁

If only Putin had taken your advice we wouldn't be in the position that we are now.

If only Putin had taken your advice we wouldn't be in the position that we are now.

So the premise is 'Socialism consists of nothing more than Protectionism?' That's it?

I disagree, old bean. While assassinating politicians may be par for the course in the 'New World', we tend to frown upon that type of behaviour in the 'Mother Country'. Bad form, don't you know?