Keir Starmer

metalblue said:
The only people comparing the two are the Starmer apologists TBF.
Click to expand...
You are trying to walk a fine line , not too much tory showing through but revelling in labours misteps , our friend who i quoted is a rapid tory shouting about labour every other page, endless posting of this paper or that tweet to pretend they are no different to the tories ,when if he wants to compare it with the tories i am happy to help
 
kaz7 said:
You are trying to walk a fine line , not too much tory showing through but revelling in labours misteps , our friend who i quoted is a rapid tory shouting about labour every other page, endless posting of this paper or that tweet to pretend they are no different to the tories ,when if he wants to compare it with the tories i am happy to help
Click to expand...

I’m not trying, my MO is to be balanced, you’ll find I also criticised the tories. I don’t like Starmer, he’s a slippery **** but I do want Labour to do well as that’s good for our country. I want any government to do well.
 
mosssideblue said:
Uni Professor on Newsnight last night was spot on. Labour are correct in saying the journey ahead is going to be painful but should get the public on board by describing the destination.

All we have at the moment, is the journey
Click to expand...
People who don’t know where they are going, usually get there…
 
metalblue said:
I’m not trying, my MO is to be balanced, you’ll find I also criticised the tories. I don’t like Starmer, he’s a slippery **** but I do want Labour to do well as that’s good for our country. I want any government to do well.
Click to expand...
Everyone should want any government to do well, but sadly that won’t be evident on an internet forum
 
metalblue said:
In situations like this you’re better off fronting it out and repenting in private.

Here is what is going to happen next. He is going to face questions on why does he not think it is appropriate to accept these in future? Does you think you shouldn’t have accepted them? Do you have poor judgment or are you dishonest? Are you going to continue to accept other gifts? What’s the difference between one gift and another?

This is going to get much more coverage now than if they’d just ignored it and quietly said “no more gifts” in private.
Click to expand...

Sky interview just now with Lucy Powell went exactly like this. They going for the football freebies now.
 
mexico1970 said:
You'd think that this thread should have been named "The Kier Starmer Appreciation" thread. That way any criticism of him could have been reported and/or contained.
Click to expand...
Weird comment I've not seen much appreciation of him. He's a wet lettuce.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PPT
Mr Kobayashi said:
That's true. There was a graphic from Sky posted earlier in the thread and Boris Johnson didn't even make the list. Presumably because he paid back the money for his renovations. Dishonest to not include him and not explain why.
Click to expand...
Ignored a million pound donation to his "office".
 
mexico1970 said:
That's the point I made, you stated that you haven't seen anyone protecting him, which one is it?

Some posters have even tried the "What about Boris" angle it's pretty embarrassing.
Click to expand...
What about Boris is the starting point for any debate about sleaze. In one sense, it's quite cheering that people do expect better now.
 
What I would say is there is a Conference then a Budget to follow to set out journey and destination but when I look at the R/W particularly media avalanche that was entirely predictable I think so far he is upsetting all the people you would expect them to
 
PPT said:
4,000 pensioners could potentially die according to... The Labour Party.
Naivety my arse.

View attachment 132371
Click to expand...
A day late but that is a deeply dishonest article and headline about a 2017 report by the Resolution Foundation about Theresa May's then proposal to cut the WFP, which would put 3800 old people "at risk". And they suggested that the effects could be alleviated by, wait for it, keeping the WFP for those claiming pension credit.
 
Quote "Keir Starmer is alleged to have broken parliamentary rules by failing to declare donations of clothing for his wife from the Labour donor Waheed Alli.

The gifts to Victoria Starmer were not initially declared in the register of MPs’ interests, the Sunday Times reported.


Starmer approached the parliamentary authorities on Tuesday to make a late declaration after being given updated advice on what needed to be registered.

The donations reportedly covered the cost of a personal shopper, clothes and alterations for Lady Starmer before and after Labour’s election win in July.

MPs are required to register gifts and donations within 28 days." End of Quote

So all of this uproar is about timing. As soon as they took further advice on the matter, they complied with the rules. It all feels a bit like Currygate. The DM and DT get a sniff of something they can chuck out there as red meat to the likes of Chippy and PPT.

Much of this took place before he was PM when the shadow cabinet were not "provided for" by the public purse in completely opposite to ministers who could claim for stuff from public money.

I openly admit the optics are poor. But let's take Arsenal tickets for example. They have now openly said they prefer him not to be in his usual seat for security reasons. My understanding is, he didn't cancel his Season ticekt to save himself a few bob but contiued to pay for it.

My preference would be that MPs get paid a load more than they do now and nothing further can be claimed-what that amount should be though is anybody's guess.
 
bluethrunthru said:
What I would say is there is a Conference then a Budget to follow to set out journey and destination but when I look at the R/W particularly media avalanche that was entirely predictable I think so far he is upsetting all the people you would expect them to
Click to expand...
I hope Robot Reeves continues to do so in her budget.

If the Daily Heil go full Farage after that will be a positive for me.
 
bluenova said:
I believe he identified there was a problem at the CPS where cases like this DIDN'T get referred to him, or other senior figures.

It's pretty well established that he introduced a new senior role at the CPS to look into this, and that when the Saville was being looked at again, this did result in him seeing the case and taking action.

So, yes it is correct that despite being head of the CPS, he didn't initially see the Saville case, and that he also put in place systems which should have picked it up if they'd been in place at the time.
Click to expand...
.... so how come Al-Fayed was not picked up (twice) then...? Just askin'?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top