Anonymous
On Sky News:
“Sir Keir Starmer is facing an investigation over a possible breach of parliamentary rules after failing to declare that some of his wife’s high-end clothes were bought for her by his biggest personal donor, Lord Alli”.
“The Labour peer paid for a personal shopper, clothes and alterations for Lady Victoria Starmer, reportedly both before and after the Labour leader became prime minister in July, according to The Sunday Times”
“This year Sir Keir has received – and disclosed – nearly £19,000 worth of work clothes and several pairs of glasses from Lord Alli, the former chairman of online fashion retailer Asos, The Times reports”
“In addition, the peer, whose personal wealth is estimated at £200m, spent £20,000 on accommodation for the now prime minister during the election and a similar sum on “private office” costs, which was also disclosed, the paper says”
“A Number 10 spokesperson told Sky News it was an oversight that had been corrected after it “sought advice from the authorities on coming to office”.
“They added: “We believed we’d been compliant, however, following further interrogation this month, we’ve declared further items.”
“Lord Alli’s involvement with the Labour leader has already proved controversial after it emerged he had been given a Downing Street security pass without apparently having a government role”.
“The revelations are awkward for the prime minister, who has promised to clean up politics”.
So where is the actual “Change” there then from the previous lot (Tories)who were in charge as the former UK government ?
As to Starmer “promising to clean up politics” well we also went down a similar path with Rishi Sunak when he became the new Tory leader and Tory PM.
When he, Sunak, “promised a government of integrity, professionalism and accountability at every level” and we all know that “promise” fell way way short in being (not) delivered, just as it now appears that Starmer’s supposed “promise” is now, as a “promise”, also failing to be delivered as well.
Of course Keir Starmer has previous form in “promising” and “pledging” a lot of things both before and after he became the Labour leader and then became the Labour PM where most , if not all of these have, like Sunak’s ‘promises’ and ‘pledges’, all fallen by the wayside.
(And just like Sunak and other Tory PM’s , we now see that with Labour in power, the buck apparently never stops with them but instead is passed on as being the fault (blame) of the opposition party when they were in power previously- this is a rinse and repeat exercise that will do nothing to ease the burden suffered by the public within the UK as it is merely them, WM politicians, “playing politics” as in the WM version).
Also for comedy value some Tories called for an “investigation” into this story about Keir Starmer, his wife and the Labour peer for what they, the Tories, stated was “cronyism” which to be fair is , as a subject , one that they the Tories are experts in (with their own Tory party being embroiled in many a cronyism scandal where some of these were reported and some were not).
However do not bother to look to the BBC in Scotland via either their Scottish TV news, Radio programmes or indeed on any of the Scottish pages on their website for either a report or an article on this particular story .
Where if there ever was an report/article by BBC Scotland on this story you would then need to see Anas Sarwar being challenged (or even timidly but never forcefully questioned and asked by the BBC here ) to defend his leader on this story.
However this is the exact type of story where we see Anas Sarwar going into hiding (as in him adopting what is now a familiar evasive manoeuvre-cowardly even-whenever there is a #BADLabourPartyUK story doing the rounds) .
Yes and he is allowed to do that as he is never sought out by the BBC in Scotland when the story in question has just been revealed as a “controversial” story by others but apparently it is not considered to be “controversial” enough by the BBC in Scotland for them to then attempt to seek out the Labour leader in Scotland for his response on it as a #BadLabourPartyUK story.
Remember throughout the recent UK GE Anas Sarwar and some other Labour MSP’s in Scotland played a very prominent part in the Labour UK GE campaign and they were all promoting their UK party and their UK leader where we also heard them all repeating the slogans “Change” and a “Fresh Start” only apparently on offer with Labour UK as the new UK government.
So that being the case they all , especially Anas Sarwar as leader (of sorts) of Labour in Scotland, then deserve to be challenged or at least asked for their responses to stories such as this one involving a Labour leader/PM, his wife and a Labour peer who donates to them as a party and also to their leader.
Of course we need to remember that so far none of us have either witnessed or experienced any real “Change” or feel we are seeing what appears to be a “Fresh Start” with Keir Starmer as PM or Labour as the new UK government.
So no amount of Labour PR by the BBC in Scotland or indeed by any of the other Labour friendly media here will be able to either convey to us or convince us that Labour have indeed brought about “Real Change” and a “Fresh start” when reality is they have shown themselves to be Tories in all but party name via their actions, words and who they associate with and also take money from (as in wealthy donors).
Remember any wealthy person who donates to a political party must surely then personally see themselves as having a vested interest via that political donation.
So with Labour in power and them also taking donations from the wealthy, we then travel down the same path that we saw being reported with the Tories ‘Cash for access’ scandals and the ,as yet unpunished, ‘Tory PPE Scandal where contracts were awarded to Tory donors , Tory Peers and those associated with the Tory party’.
Tory donor, Tory Peer and Tory leader/Tory PM so what’s changed now with Labour ?
(BTW what the H is happening with the NCA investigation into Tory Peer Michelle Mone and the Tory PPE scandal -where also former Tory minister Michael Gove was noted as being involved in this incident/scandal- and why is she , Mone, still a Peer ?
That’s another topic that was and still is pretty much left untouched by BBC Scotland even though she, Mone, is a Scottish Tory peer so surely this scandal connected to her is of some interest to the Scottish public).
Maybe all of the supposed “Controversial”, “Fiasco” and “Crisis” and “Scandalous” stories are always only to be reserved for one party alone in Scotland by the BBC here and other media here too.
No need for me to mention who that party is .
Talking-up Scotland 'Albatraz' 
No sign of Sarwar the poor man was ill on Thursday maybe he would be *hit**ng himself about being asked a question on the WFP now we have this twisted PM getting money to dress his wife,is Stammer going to come up here to meet some pensioners or is it just a case of doing a Boris let the bodies pill high.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Elite
Eletist Gold… May be confusing, otherwise
Presently, we see this example – no surmise
Amateur poetry, enjoyable writing (surprise}
Guilty as written here ~ ‘Unions can demise.
Ewenart
© Ewen A Morrison
LikeLike
David Lammy went on Sunday Morning claimed that Keir Starmer had to take bribes from a donor because unlike the US President, he does not have a clothing allowance. That just happens to be a lie. The President of the US and his wife do NOT have a clothing allowance and moreover, unlike the UK, gifts to the president are very strictly governed by law and any gift over $180 in value becomes the property of the US government. WHY is there no such law in the UK? I’m not sure I want to know.
But maybe the UK can take money for a clothing allowance for the Starmers out of the savings from ripping away the heating allowance to most pensioners.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I’m sure the S̶c̶o̶t̶t̶i̶s̶h̶ British bullshine corporation will have some suitably distracted headline lined up.
“LOOK OVER THERE!”*
*or similar
LikeLiked by 2 people
How absolutely greedy are these people. Beyond belief. Grotesque salaries and expenses and they cannot even buy their own clothes. Starving pensioners and the young. Absolutely disgusting. Pensioners and the young and the vulnerable. These unionists have no shame. Disgusting misuse of the public purse. They should be put in jail for fraud.
LikeLiked by 1 person
How could people in Scotland ever have voted for that bunch of corrupt fraudsters.
More illegal war, tax evasion, HS2, Hinkley Point. Losing £Billions with nuclear dumped in Scotland. Brexit costing £Billions. Ruining the economy and misusing Scottish resources and revenues.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It’s utterly disgusting actually, the greedy troughers in power at Westminster, taking freebies, starving little children and freezing poor people to death in winter, criminal.
Mone is still a peerbecause if they remove her she will snitch on folks she’s not daft, and others woudl have to be kicked out as well for dodgy dealings they were involved in no doubt.
The whole system, cash from donors for MP’s, the royals, HOL’s etc is backward, undemocratic and not what you’d want of a so called democracy, quite the opposite in fact.
Sad and scary for Scotland, with a very powerful EngBritNat state in control, and their dodgy pals pulling the strings, Scotland is in greta peril. Yikes, UKEng Labour are proving themselves to be ‘worse’ than the Tories in fact.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I was more intrigued by the deviousness of the original story in the Times than the subject itself, as revealed in the Sky quote -“A Number 10 spokesperson told Sky News it was an oversight that had been corrected after it “sought advice from the authorities on coming to office”. They added: “We believed we’d been compliant, however, following further interrogation this month, we’ve declared further items.”
Whilst I agree it doesn’t sit right, the reality is it never has, but that’s the attraction for some of being an MP or PM, the bungs you only need declare and pay BIK on…. Anybody recall wallpaper for number 10 ?
Yet this looks every bit a piece of Tory muckraking via their friends in the media to make Labour appear worse than they were…. It’s not as if Starmer is soaring in popularity, quite the reverse…
LikeLike
Listen I remember when, in 2019, a female SNP Glasgow Lord Provost was reported by The Daily Record for claiming for 23 pairs of shoes on expenses and it was a very big story on the BBC Website for Scotland.
In defence it was stated on the BBC website that:
“Her role incurs personal expenses as she is required to represent the city at hundreds of events” and it was also stated that “there was no accusation of impropriety against the Lord Provost of Glasgow Eva Bolander”.
“The money spent was within the civic allowance allocated to the council by the Scottish government”
However the BBC article also stated that :
“The issue here is whether the amount spent on clothes was necessarily politically wise at a time when local government continues to face tough financial choices”.
“For opposition parties, the story seems like an open goal. Try justifying spending on clothes to someone unhappy about a cut or an unfilled pothole“.
“The question is whether spending this amount of money on clothes is an appropriate use of public resource – does it send out the right signals about the administration in Glasgow or about local government in general? This is to a large extent about the optics”.
This BBC article then proceeded to note the ” the council also came under fire for accepting a Rolls Royce Ghost for use as the Lord Provost’s car by an anonymous donor at a time when it was preparing to increase nursery fees by 57%”.
This was then revealed to have been “donated by Boyd Tunnock owner of the Tunnock’s biscuit business” (as in he who was and still is supportive of the Tories and the UK and not supportive of the SNP or independence).
“The businessman said he just wanted to do “a good thing” for the city”
Former Labour MSP James Kelly said about the Lord Provost that “her position was not tenable” and also said “”While services for homeless people across Glasgow are being cut, the SNP Lord Provost has been touring the city in a grotesque spending spree at the taxpayers’ expense”.
Tory MSP Annie Wells ” “For any politician to think they can claim something like this on expenses is a joke”
Both said she , the Provost, should resign, which let’s be honest is both Labour & the Tories answer to everything relating to any politician within the SNP.
So I am sure James Kelly would be one of many who would see nothing wrong with news that Keir Starmer and his wife (?) accepted yet more money from a Labour donor who was also a Labour peer for clothing at a time when it was also recently reported his, Starmer’s, government was going to keep the Tory two child cap policy and also cut the winter fuel allowance for pensioners (apart from those on benefits).Then Annie Wells would be happy to defend Boris Johnson’s spending spree in Downing street decor (as noted above by Bob Lamont).
Imagine if instead of ‘expenses allocated for a clothing allowance to represent the city as Lord Provost’ this Glasgow provost had instead accepted thousands of pounds donated from a wealthy SNP donor. what media and opposition response would there have been then ?
Most certainly would not have been, in that scenario, a case of ‘nothing to see here all above board and so acceptable’.
Looking good and presentable for an ‘elevated role as a politician’ seems ok up to an extent.
However there should be a limit on amount that is spent, even at times a cut to the clothing allowance when times are hard as the optics and morally it does not look good if your council are making cuts to services while you are spending what seems like an excessive amount on clothing.
However that also works at every political level.
It seems that the UK PM and his wife can spend money donated by Labour Peers to look good for the UK .
Indeed David Lammy defended this yesterday and he said that they ” accepted donations of clothing so they could “look their best” to represent the UK“.
He, Lammy, also said “other countries had generous taxpayer-funded budgets for leaders’ clothing”. (well he, David lammy, better not tell former Labour MSP James Kelly about that especially now with the cuts being made by Keir Starmer).
It was also reported in January this year that before he became the PM Keir Starmer “flew in a private jet paid for by Qatar to visit the country’s leader last month, according to parliamentary records”
This was so that he could, as Labour leader, be able to ” attend the COP28 climate conference held in Dubai” and that “declaration of financial interests showed that the trip for him and three staffers cost £25,508”.
So the poor Millionaire Keir Starmer wanted the job and took the job of PM but needs someone to pay for his and his wife’s clothes and this then should be filed under ‘nothing to see here’. (rinse and repeat I am sure for many a Tory PM also).
LikeLike
What are those people wearing. The emperor has no clothes. Fooled once, fooled twice. Not again. Richi millionaire suits did not even fit. Too much fasting.
LikeLike
Here we go again.
This may be considered too petty of me by some people but for me it seems a tad suspicious, strange and also knowing how the BBC works in Scotland, in them often misinforming us in Scotland, then this also seems deliberate as an action by them.
So what am I referring to.
Well I noted this on the BBC website.
BBC website has the exact same article on their UK main page, NI main page and Scotland main page but not on the England main page.
Headline “Titanic shipyard to go into administration”
So why on NI main page ?
Well the Titanic was built in Belfast, NI.
So why on UK page ?
Well NI part of the UK.
So why on Scotland main page ?
Well apparently the “Shipbuilding company Harland and Wolff” has an operation in “Methil and Arnish in Scotland“
However they also have an operation in “Appledore in England” according to this BBC article yet the BBC, via their website, don’t see it as necessary to put this same article/story on the England main page.
So at a glance if one did not open this article on the main Scotland page in order to read the article fully.
But instead one only saw the headline on the main Scotland page then you may have incorrectly assumed that this was down to some ‘failure’ or ‘lack of support’ by the Scottish government. As in them not protecting or helping a business within Scotland when it was in trouble and one with an iconic connection too as in the tragic story of the sunken ship the Titanic.
I mean if this Shipbuilding company has connections throughout the UK as a state. (excluding Wales).
Also connections in NI as a country
Also one connection in Scotland as a country .
But then also one connection in England too as a country .
Then surely the same article by the BBC should have been on all of the respective main pages for all countries within the UK with a connection to “Harland and Wolff” ?
Also as stated above the headline refers to the Titanic and everyone knows it was a ship that was built in Belfast so did the BBC really need to put the exact same story on the Scotland main page when the only actual ‘Scottish connection’ was that the company who built the Titanic, Harland & Wolff, also had an operation in one place in Scotland ?
(However that , as a situation, was applicable too for England yet it seems, for the BBC , it was not deemed by them as being either applicable or important to place the same article on the English main page for the English connection to Harland & Wolff).
So the content of the article states that ” non-core operations are being wound down” and “process had already started with the closure of its Scilly Isles (Cornish coast) ferry service before sailing had even begun”.
The article also noted that “The company said the administration process will be confined to the holding company, Harland & Wolff Group Holdings plc, and the operational companies which run the yards are expected to continue trading”
This is a pattern of behaviour with the BBC where they try to hide any ‘English’ connection in case it reflects badly upon them or perhaps the BBC also see the UK as being synonymous with England.
On the other hand I think there is no perhaps about it !
LikeLike
OMG
Re my comment above about Titanic story on the BBC website this story has now been changed and a new headline applied but only for Scotland main page and headline is now :
“Fears for Scottish jobs as Harland & Wolff faces administration”
Story headline however is still unchanged on UK main page and NI main page from original headline so is the same as before re my above comment as in ““Titanic shipyard to go into administration”.
Still nothing on England main page for either headline.
The BBC also have form of changing headlines on their Scotland pages for the same story.
LikeLike
This would be the English government who refused to honour a commitment to H&W to act as fund guarantor for a new service ( Ferry had already undergone trials and operational date agreed). H&W withdrew, no doubt at a loss, to focus on their ‘ core ‘ business.
Just imagine the uproar had the SG been involved.
Golfnut
LikeLike
“Just imagine the uproar had the SG been involved”
However funnily enough under the new headline and new article on the Scotland page which the BBC decided to alter as a headline and alter as an article only for the Scotland page. (UK page and NI page still has old headline and old article) .
The content of this new article includes this from one of the Labour party’s little helpers in Scotland as in the GMB Union.
“Gary Cook, GMB Scotland said “Both the Scottish and UK Governments have made promises of a just transition. It’s now time for them to keep those promises and secure the future of these yards.”
So blame has been apportioned for both governments by Gary Cook from the GMB Union.
Apparently , in this new BBC website (amended) article it states that there are two sites in Scotland for this company( not just one as I wrongly specified in my previous comment).
Seems always to be that it can never be proclaimed as just being the fault of the UK government but instead the usual suspects from the GMB Union, and some others too, always have to blame , involve or implicate the Scottish government as well and so accuse them of being equally to blame ( see Grangemouth also) on all matters.
That accusation usually starts with “Both the Scottish and UK governments” so much so it is now a common phrase we hear and read about when there is any negative news connected to Scotland. (alternate being totally blaming only the Scottish government of course while ignoring the role either played- or not played- by the UK government)
LikeLike