Keir Starmer fails to declare gifts to wife from millionaire party donor in Parliament rule breach

26 comments

1. Same donor that got an unjustified security badge to No 10.

   Starmer didn’t declare it because he claims he thought only gifts to himself counted. As if donating tens of thousands to his wife was entirely OK.

   I hope people are happy with their vote.

2. Exactly the same as the rest of them.

   Perhaps even worse.

   I’d be embarrassed if I’d voted Labour.

   Edit: Here come the denial downvotes. 😂

3. Just a red tie Tory at this point. Or, any point for that matter, as this was all painfully obvious

4. Easy to make such a mistake unless you were, say, a very senior lawyer or something. This isn’t even particularly complicated – gifts to his wife. It’s surely obvious those are relevant?

   The man is such a self-righteous hypocrite.

5. Is he supposed to monitor his wife then? Is he supposed to quiz her on where a handbag came from?
   I guess the Neanderthal world of Parliament may well see all that as normal.

6. Let those without a millionaire sugar daddy cast the first stone.

7. Starmer putting the trust back into politics. One high end fashion show at a time.

8. If a story on the same monetary value as this, had broken two years ago, but the MP was a Tory front bencher, what would have been the demand from Keir Starmer?

   Losing the party whip?

   Referral to the privileges committee?

   Suspension as an MP?

   Recall petition?

   Ok, probably not the last two. But probably yes the first two.

   EDIT: because I’ve just realised what Keir Starmer would 100% definitely demand if the situation was reversed, he’d demand the MP in question pay back the gifts in full.

9. [removed]

10. Eat it up!the Bovine Electorite t5hat have just let aZionist Bolshevick Gov in by way of a BENT electoral system deserves what it gets. You aint seen Nothing Yet.!

11. Breaching the code of conduct should have **real** consequences.

    No matter the colour of their party logo.

12. This country will always be run by thieves, the only difference is the colour of their neckties.

13. It’s like 10k wallpaper but for the Indecent Proposal.

14. Ho, ho laughed Sir Keir, you thought I was different?

15. 64 comments in 40 minutes on a negative Starmer post? Reminds me of any Corbyn post.

16. I voted for him but there’s no excuse for this. He’s a lawyer and this is corruption.

    Edit: why is this being downvoted? Am I missing something?

17. Christ alive. The amount of people who simply haven’t read the article and are painting this government out to be this hot bed of corruption is absurd.

    From the linked article if anyone cared to read it

    >Downing Street is understood to have sought advice about the declarations it needed to make in relation to Lady Starmer as soon as Sir Keir took office.

    >However, when No 10 then sought further advice on Tuesday, it emerged the previous advice that had been given was incorrect.

    So it wasn’t some deliberate attempt to cover something up, or negligence. He was given advice, acted upon it appropriately, found out it was incorrect, and attempted to rectify the mistake. The behaviour you would want from your politician essentially.

18. And so the media smears are in full swing. Absolutely nobody can stand up as the prime minister of the uk and say, you won’t catch any dirt, you know, like the rest of us squeaky clean people 

19. I wish we could implement a “no comments until you’ve passed a short exam on the article contents” rule.

20. From the article

    “Downing Street is understood to have sought advice about the declarations it needed to make in relation to Lady Starmer as soon as Sir Keir took office.

    However, when No 10 then sought further advice on Tuesday, it emerged the previous advice that had been given was incorrect.”

21. “Downing Street is understood to have sought advice about the declarations it needed to make in relation to Lady Starmer as soon as Sir Keir took office.

    However, when No 10 then sought further advice on Tuesday, it emerged the previous advice that had been given was incorrect.

    A late declaration of the gifts will now show up next month. The rules that govern MPs’ conduct state that politicians must register “any benefit given to a third party”.

    A spokesman for Sir Keir said: “We sought advice from the authorities on coming to office and from there believed we had been compliant.

    “However, following further interrogation this month, we’ve declared further items.””

    Yet another nothing burger article from the telegraph seeking to paint usual government procedure as corruption in order to normalise Tory cronyism.

22. Got to love the posters who pushing the notion that all you need to do to bribe the PM of the UK is give his wife a few fancy dresses.

23. That click bait title really did sucker you all in and it shows who did and didn’t read the detail.

24. As a staunch Labour supporter, I am disappointed that they are accepting gifts from donors (donations aside). I thought Kier was better than this

25. I work in the public sector. We need to declare ANY gift above £10. To the point that no one even picked up 10.99 calendars we get as gifts from a guy.

    He can “oopsies” all he likes but why isn’t he declaring everything like I have to? Is it just one giant adventure of freebies that would take too long to do?

26. A terrible start for this Labour government…he isn’t going to last is he