Prime Minister Starmer Defends Taking Donations Amid Criticism

[Social Media]

 

Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer has indicated that he will continue accepting donations from Lord Alli, a prominent Labour donor, despite controversy over clothing provided to his wife. The Prime Minister faced questions about gifts from the peer, including clothes and alterations for Lady Starmer following Labour's election victory in July. Starmer acknowledged receiving gifts but stated he would follow parliamentary rules regarding their declaration.

 

The Prime Minister’s actions have drawn scrutiny, as it is alleged that he failed to declare the donations within the required timeframe, breaching parliamentary regulations. The donations, including clothing and personal shopping services from Lord Alli, were not initially registered in the MPs’ interests, but Starmer made a late declaration after seeking advice from parliamentary authorities.

 

Lord Alli has been a longstanding supporter of Starmer, previously donating various items such as spectacles and accommodation. While questioned on the matter during a trip to Italy, Starmer downplayed the controversy, asserting that “all Members of Parliament get gifts” and emphasizing a distinction between declarations and corruption. He added, "The rules say, over a certain value, you’ve got to declare the gifts, so everybody can see what it was, how much it was, who it came from… that’s a good framework."

 

The Conservative Party has called for an investigation, with a formal request sent to the Parliamentary Standards Commissioner. Tory MP Daniel Greenberg raised concerns over Starmer's delayed declaration and referenced a report suggesting that Lord Alli, despite holding no formal government role, had been granted a temporary Downing Street security pass and played an influential role in key Cabinet appointments.

 

Starmer defended his actions, explaining that his team sought advice following the election on the proper procedure for declarations, and any delay was part of a “genuine and proper exercise.” He maintained that he had complied with all necessary rules and continued to argue that the issue at hand was one of transparency, not corruption. "There’s a massive difference between declarations and corruption," he told reporters.

 

Starmer also addressed his receipt of complimentary football tickets, which he has accepted more than 20 times during his time in Parliament. These included tickets to Arsenal matches, where he is a regular supporter. Starmer explained that due to security concerns, he cannot sit in the stands and therefore must accept hospitality. "Never going to an Arsenal game again because I can’t accept hospitality is pushing it a bit far," he remarked.

 

Foreign Secretary David Lammy defended the Prime Minister, arguing that donations helped ensure that Starmer and his wife could "look their best" while representing the country. Lammy compared the situation to that of the U.S., where presidents and first ladies are provided with a taxpayer-funded wardrobe. However, Starmer made it clear that he did not support such a system in the UK.

 

The matter continues to stir debate, with calls for clarity on the Prime Minister's future handling of donations and the broader issue of transparency within the government. Despite the backlash, Starmer insists he will follow the rules, stating, “Wherever there are gifts from anyone, I’m going to comply with the rules.”

 

Credit: Daily Telegraph 2024-09-18

 

 

 

[DonniePeverley]

Suppose the accusation is the hypocrisy - as did he fair bit of moaning about in opposition.

 

What does the guys who give him free stuff get out of it is the question?

 

If you look at all the big decisions ... Rishi Sunak made the rite call on most things. Economy looked to be improving, and now Labour may use Albania copying the Rawanda scheme. 

Edited September 17 by DonniePeverley

[James105]

Socialist doing what socialists do shocker.  "Those with the broadest shoulders will have to pay" he says, whilst paying for nothing himself even though he is a multi millionaire and removing the winter fuel allowance from vulnerable pensioners. 

 

Maybe 5 years of this will wake people up to the fact that whilst socialism sounds good on paper to the young and naive, it destroys lives, wrecks economies and kills millions.   Hopefully this will put it to bed for another generation once this 5 years is up.   

[JonnyF]

Yet more hypocrisy from two tier Keir. I remember him slating the Tories for the same thing. 

 

Lammy of course backed him up, bemoaning the fact that UK taxpayers don't pay for it. Read the room David, you've just taken away pensioners fuel allowance. Politically inept and morally bankrupt. 

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/sep/15/david-lammy-pms-and-partners-rely-on-donors-to-help-them-look-their-best

 

[BritManToo]

6 hours ago, Social Media said:

referenced a report suggesting that Lord Alli, despite holding no formal government role, had been granted a temporary Downing Street security pass and played an influential role in key Cabinet appointments.

I used to work for Waheed Alli (minor contractor for Planet 24) in the days when he financed New Labour and Tony Blair. Great guy, very generous with free drinks, even used to greet me by name (even though I was a nobody).

 

Can't see any reason why he shouldn't get a security pass, after all, he's financed the Labour party for the past 30 years.

[jippytum]

Great.. cutting pensioners fuel allowance and then accepting free clothes for the missus. 

[blazes]

16 minutes ago, jippytum said:

Great.. cutting pensioners fuel allowance and then accepting free clothes for the missus. 

 

But but but...don't you see: once the clothes have been worn,  they will be given to a charity store, so that some poor pensioner this winter can put on  a few extra layers at very small cost.

Win win all round......

[Chomper Higgot]

I see The Daily Telegraph are still in that place of hurt they’ve been in silence July 5.

[nahkit]

9 hours ago, Social Media said:

Starmer defended his actions, explaining that his team sought advice following the election on the proper procedure for declarations, and any delay was part of a “genuine and proper exercise.”

Whilst I think the whole thing is a storm in a teacup, the idea that the leader of the country doesn't understand the procedure for declarations after how many years as an mp is laughable (or very worrying, take your pick).

[James105]

26 minutes ago, nahkit said:

Whilst I think the whole thing is a storm in a teacup, the idea that the leader of the country doesn't understand the procedure for declarations after how many years as an mp is laughable (or very worrying, take your pick).

 

That would be fine if he didn't make such a big song and dance out of it when others broke the rules whilst he was in opposition.   The fact he did so makes him a massive hypocrite.  

 

 

[JonnyF]

38 minutes ago, nahkit said:

Whilst I think the whole thing is a storm in a teacup, the idea that the leader of the country doesn't understand the procedure for declarations after how many years as an mp is laughable (or very worrying, take your pick).

 

He understands. He's just incredibly arrogant and the power has clearly gone to his head. 

[JonnyF]

1 hour ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I see The Daily Telegraph are still in that place of hurt they’ve been in silence July 5.

 

They're hardly being silent about it. 

 

Shouting from the rooftops in fact. That's the great thing about a free press in a Democracy. No doubt Starmer will be clamping down on this soon. He might have to release some more rapists to make space for the journalists. 

[Chomper Higgot]

1 minute ago, JonnyF said:

 

They're hardly being silent about it. 

 

Shouting from the rooftops in fact. That's the great thing about a free press in a Democracy. No doubt Starmer will be clamping down on this soon. He might have to release some more rapists to make space for the journalists. 

Your imagination is wasted Jonny, you could write novels; fictional fantasy stuff seems to be your natural genre.

 

[John Drake]

Unseemly when one grown man needs another to buy him his underwear.

[Red Forever]

11 hours ago, DonniePeverley said:

Suppose the accusation is the hypocrisy - as did he fair bit of moaning about in opposition.

 

What does the guys who give him free stuff get out of it is the question?

 

If you look at all the big decisions ... Rishi Sunak made the rite call on most things. Economy looked to be improving, and now Labour may use Albania copying the Rawanda scheme. 

Oh dear. The right whingers are really scraping the bottom of the barrel.

The Rwanda (correct spelling) fiasco was all about getting rid of Jonny Foreigner to placate the frothing Kipper, BNP, white nationalists.

The Albania plan is to process asylum application in situ so that those eligible won't have to suffer a Channel crossing.

I know it's hard for you rightards but you must accept that .... erm.. . you lost, get over it!

[Nick Carter icp]

2 minutes ago, Red Forever said:

Oh dear. The right whingers are really scraping the bottom of the barrel.

The Rwanda (correct spelling) fiasco was all about getting rid of Jonny Foreigner to placate the frothing Kipper, BNP, white nationalists.

The Albania plan is to process asylum application in situ so that those eligible won't have to suffer a Channel crossing.

I know it's hard for you rightards but you must accept that .... erm.. . you lost, get over it!

 

  Although this thread is about Starmer   the Labour leader receiving person gifts which could be corruption .

    Its deflection to mention Rwanda and the Conservatives and to change the subject of the topic .

  "Is Labour leader Starmer corrupt ?"

*The Right wing are racists blah blah blah*

[Nick Carter icp]

12 hours ago, Social Media said:

Starmer also addressed his receipt of complimentary football tickets, which he has accepted more than 20 times during his time in Parliament. These included tickets to Arsenal matches, where he is a regular supporter. Starmer explained that due to security concerns, he cannot sit in the stands and therefore must accept hospitality.

 

   Really , the previous Prime Minister Rishi Sunak went to football games in the stands with other supporters , why could the opposition leader Keir Starmer  do the same ?

 

 

   

   Then Prime Minister Rishi Sunak at a football match 

[Red Forever]

2 hours ago, JonnyF said:

 

They're hardly being silent about it. 

 

Shouting from the rooftops in fact. That's the great thing about a free press in a Democracy. No doubt Starmer will be clamping down on this soon. He might have to release some more rapists to make space for the journalists. 

Yeah right. He has to "make space" in prisons cos previous administrations defunded (along with all public utilities) the prison service.

 

1 minute ago, Nick Carter icp said:

 

  Although this thread is about Starmer   the Labour leader receiving person gifts which could be corruption .

    Its deflection to mention Rwanda and the Conservatives and to change the subject of the topic .

  "Is Labour leader Starmer corrupt ?"

*The Right wing are racists blah blah blah*

Erm, I think you should re-read the thread.

I'll make it simple. I didn't deflect. Your like minded right whinger flexible Jonny raised the Rwanda thingy. I merely responded to his/her post.

Do keep up old chap.

[Nick Carter icp]

7 minutes ago, Red Forever said:

Yeah right. He has to "make space" in prisons cos previous administrations defunded (along with all public utilities) the prison service.

 

Erm, I think you should re-read the thread.

I'll make it simple. I didn't deflect. Your like minded right whinger flexible Jonny raised the Rwanda thingy. I merely responded to his/her post.

Do keep up old chap.

 

You are blaming other people for your posts ?

You did post about Rwanda , even if other people did as well

Another deflection .

 

[JonnyF]

14 minutes ago, Red Forever said:

I'll make it simple. I didn't deflect. Your like minded right whinger flexible Jonny raised the Rwanda thingy.

 

No he didn't.

 

Pleb Forever is showing his age. 

[JonnyF]

16 minutes ago, Red Forever said:

Yeah right. He has to "make space" in prisons cos previous administrations defunded (along with all public utilities) the prison service.

 

Jailing people for hurty words on FaceBook isn't helping.

 

Huw got away without serving a day though, so you should be OK for now. 

[youreavinalaff]

3 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I see The Daily Telegraph are still in that place of hurt they’ve been in silence July 5.

You're a Guardian reader.

 

Did you miss the article on the same issue in your chosen rag?

[Chomper Higgot]

12 minutes ago, youreavinalaff said:

You're a Guardian reader.

 

Did you miss the article on the same issue in your chosen rag?

I sometimes read The Guardian, I don’t read it everyday and I certainly don’t read every article they publish.

 

So not so much ‘missed the article’ as didn’t read The Guardian whenever it was the article was published.

 

My ‘chosen rag’ at the moment is a piece of an old T-shirt that I’m using to clean one my road bikes.

 

 

[Chomper Higgot]

25 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

Jailing people for hurty words on FaceBook isn't helping.

 

Huw got away without serving a day though, so you should be OK for now. 

Once again, nobody has been jailed for ‘hurty words on Facebook. 
 

Give us their names Jonny and I’ll once again link reports of the crimes they were actually imprisoned and/or held on remand for.

 

Oh and you couldn’t help yourself with the slur could you?!

 

 

[James105]

1 hour ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Once again, nobody has been jailed for ‘hurty words on Facebook. 
 

Give us their names Jonny and I’ll once again link reports of the crimes they were actually imprisoned and/or held on remand for.

 

Oh and you couldn’t help yourself with the slur could you?!

 

 

 

Yes, they have.  This guy posted some memes.

 

https://www.newsandstar.co.uk/news/24513379.sellafield-worker-jailed-sharing-offensive-facebook-posts/

 

This one posted emojis:

 

https://www.newsandstar.co.uk/news/24506682.maryport-man-jailed-facebook-post-police-bid-stop-disorder/

 

Perhaps you can enlighten everyone why these characters deserved a harsher punishment than a pedophile who had "category A" images (the most extreme kind) of children as young as 7 on his phone.   

[Chomper Higgot]

38 minutes ago, James105 said:

 

Yes, they have.  This guy posted some memes.

 

https://www.newsandstar.co.uk/news/24513379.sellafield-worker-jailed-sharing-offensive-facebook-posts/

 

This one posted emojis:

 

https://www.newsandstar.co.uk/news/24506682.maryport-man-jailed-facebook-post-police-bid-stop-disorder/

 

Perhaps you can enlighten everyone why these characters deserved a harsher punishment than a pedophile who had "category A" images (the most extreme kind) of children as young as 7 on his phone.   

Your first hate monger was convicted as follows:

 

”Lee Dunn, date of birth 10/07/1973, is from Egremont, Cumbria and pleaded guilty to a charge of sending a grossly offensive message, contrary to section 127(1)(a) and (3) of the Communications Act 2003.”

 

So not for posting ‘hurty words’ as claimed by the grievance strokers among us.

As an added ‘gift’ for his hate mongering, he’s almost certainly lost the security clearance he needs to work at Sellsfield.

 

Your second martyr was convicted of racially aggravated breach of Section 127 of the Communications Act.

 

I suggest you read the link you provided and not dismiss the factors the court considered.

 

https://www.cps.gov.uk/north-west/news/man-jailed-offensive-social-media-posts-wake-recent-disorder

 

https://www.news.cumbria.police.uk/news/man-convicted-for-posting-racially-aggravated-online-content-as-part-of-carlisle-policing-operation

Edited September 18 by Chomper Higgot

[Chomper Higgot]

35 minutes ago, James105 said:

Perhaps you can enlighten everyone why these characters deserved a harsher punishment than a pedophile who had "category A" images (the most extreme kind) of children as young as 7 on his phone. 

I have already responded in the thread discussing that case with very clear statements that I believe the pervert should have been sentenced to prison.

 

If you have any comments on my views on that matter, respond in the thread dedicated to the topic.

[James105]

2 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Your first hate monger was convicted as follows:

 

”Lee Dunn, date of birth 10/07/1973, is from Egremont, Cumbria and pleaded guilty to a charge of sending a grossly offensive message, contrary to section 127(1)(a) and (3) of the Communications Act 2003.”

 

So not for posting ‘hurty words’ as claimed by the grievance strikers among us.

As an added ‘gift’ for his hate momgering, he’s almost certainly lost the security clearance he needs to work at Sellsfield.

 

Your second martyr was convicted of racially aggravated breach of Section 127 of the Communications Act.

 

I suggest you read the link you provided and not dismiss the factors the court considered.

 

https://www.cps.gov.uk/north-west/news/man-jailed-offensive-social-media-posts-wake-recent-disorder

 

https://www.news.cumbria.police.uk/news/man-convicted-for-posting-racially-aggravated-online-content-as-part-of-carlisle-policing-operation

 

sending a grossly offensive message = hurty words

breach of Section 127 of the Communications Act = hurty words

 

They posted hurty words and were jailed for it.   They didn't have category A images of 7 year olds on their phones.  They didn't physically assault anyone.   It's literally hurty words they were jailed for.

[Regyai]

I hear that after the budget anyone not in happy link step with Keir's policies can apply for a free pager

 

[Chomper Higgot]

Just now, James105 said:

 

sending a grossly offensive message = hurty words

breach of Section 127 of the Communications Act = hurty words

 

They posted hurty words and were jailed for it.   They didn't have category A images of 7 year olds on their phones.  They didn't physically assault anyone.   It's literally hurty words they were jailed for.

Give over with the gaslighting, your martyrs were imprisoned for posting grossly offensive content in breach of the communications act.

Read the links you yourself orovided

 

 They both confessed their crimes.

 

Section 127 of the Communications Act linked below for your reference.

 

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/21/section/127