Starmer Took 20K

[westcountryvillain]

"Dad"
"Yes son"
"I can't revise for my GCSE's with the press camped outside"
"Well WTF do you want me to do about it, I am the PM after all and everyone else has to live with whatever distractions they have"
"Oh hang on......"

He shouldn't have accepted the gift, declared or not - he should have paid for his own son to revise in a quiet place, is he really so tone deaf to not ask himself why donors donate, no such thing as a free lunch.

[WBA123]

Should a free flat be extended to kids who share bedrooms with siblings so canÂ’t focus, houses that live next door to very busy roads or kids who canÂ’t afford lap tops or computers!

Sorry Matt itÂ’s not right and this p rick should be setting an example! I thought he wanted to help state school kids but hey all about his own son! What next this donor paying for private tuition lessons because he might get bullied at school!

Of course he canÂ’t go in the normal seats at the emirates. But does have single person in corporate hospitality earn more than his 400K declared a year? No! So why should someone on 50 or 100K a year have to pay for corporate hospitality and this p rick gets it free? He should pay for it like the rest of the people!!!!

To be fair, Starmer's son used his mate's flat in London for peace and quiet while studying for his exams. He didn't get given £20k, he declared it at that amount.

I'm pretty surprised by the level of media coverage this has received given as it seems like a non-story to me.

[soulman101]

Never revised for any of my exams ,got good grades in all my O levels and all my trade qualifications .

[kettering_baggie]

If I had ever been offered a £20K ‘space’ to do my exam revision, I would have taken it, too. Would have been ideal for ‘Biology’ revision…….!

[soulman101]

If I had ever been offered a £20K ‘space’ to do my exam revision, I would have taken it, too. Would have been ideal for ‘Biology’ revision…….!

[baggieal]

To be fair, Starmer's son used his mate's flat in London for peace and quiet while studying for his exams. He didn't get given £20k, he declared it at that amount.

I'm pretty surprised by the level of media coverage this has received given as it seems like a non-story to me.

Then NO gifts should be taken like any other organisation. If Starmer represents the country at a Euros Final for example then this would be different. No professional buyers in large blue chip companies are allowed to accept gifts even if they are declared so why should Starmer be any different? There's also the matter of most in purchasing earn under 100K but this
p rick declared 400K so why should the greedy t wat accept anything?

Are we saying everybody who goes in corporate hospitality earns more than 400K. No - so why the hell should he expect freebies? Most kids would have loved to have see Taylor Swift but this p rick did not spend hours on his computer trying to get tickets or pay a bean for them!

What example does this set for our children many who are lucky to get a hot meal?

[WBA123]

Then NO gifts should be taken like any other organisation. If Starmer represents the country at a Euros Final for example then this would be different. No professional buyers in large blue chip companies are allowed to accept gifts even if they are declared so why should Starmer be any different? There's also the matter of most in purchasing earn under 100K but this
p rick declared 400K so why should the greedy t wat accept anything?

Are we saying everybody who goes in corporate hospitality earns more than 400K. No - so why the hell should he expect freebies? Most kids would have loved to have see Taylor Swift but this p rick did not spend hours on his computer trying to get tickets or pay a bean for them!

What example does this set for our children many who are lucky to get a hot meal?

I wouldn't be against the 'no gifts' option because then there's a red line that everyone adheres to.

I suppose why I think this is different is because he didn't financially gain anything from this transaction. And because it was declared in black and white. Where it gets murky is when these things are not declared properly or at all...and Boris had a good swing at doing those things. Basically, I don't think Starmer has done anything underhand in this scenario.

I don't really see your point in the last sentence. Firstly, he has only just taken over, if kids aren't getting a hot meal a lot of that blame has to be given to the Tories. Secondly, are you saying that to set a good example he should impoverish himself and his family? Seems a bizarre comparison.

[Albionic68]

He may not have gained financially in terms of income but he most definitely hasn't lost out financially by others paying out thousands on his behalf either. He's absolutely gained financially by not being out of pocket for what he's received.

I get the football upgrades in relation to security for himself and by association members of the public. Possibly even a nice little holiday somewhere hot at an acquaintances remote holiday island too in that regard. Just about.

But every day things like glasses, clothes and a 'quiet place' for his kid to revise which runs to £20,000 is taking the p iss. He can afford glasses and clothing and as for peace and quiet Downing Street isn't exactly the Gaza Strip or even a high rise in a s hitty part of London a waiter wouldn't be seen dead in.

Wondering what's next and how much the Prime Minister's @rsewipers are coming to for some rich tunc looking for a tax right off. After all, he can't possibly be expected to wipe it himself as he needs both hands free to grasp the next handout he won't gain from in terms of income either.

I'm also wondering whether anyone will be looking back to what he did or didn't receive and transparently declare from his days in the legal profession. Now that could prove potentially 'awkward' given he shouldn't have taken a fkn bean.

[baggieal]

I wouldn't be against the 'no gifts' option because then there's a red line that everyone adheres to.

I suppose why I think this is different is because he didn't financially gain anything from this transaction. And because it was declared in black and white. Where it gets murky is when these things are not declared properly or at all...and Boris had a good swing at doing those things. Basically, I don't think Starmer has done anything underhand in this scenario.

I don't really see your point in the last sentence. Firstly, he has only just taken over, if kids aren't getting a hot meal a lot of that blame has to be given to the Tories. Secondly, are you saying that to set a good example he should impoverish himself and his family? Seems a bizarre comparison.

But don’t you think every other kid would want a luxury freebie flat to revise in - many kids share with siblings - have houses next to motorways - kids don’t have lap tops etc.

Why should his kid be any different? It’s an inducement from that donor! Having been a very senior buyer for a large corporation it was drummed into you - there’s no such thing as a free lunch!

Set an example so he should the smarmy p rick

[baggiematt]

But don’t you think every other kid would want a luxury freebie flat to revise in - many kids share with siblings - have houses next to motorways - kids don’t have lap tops etc.

Why should his kid be any different? It’s an inducement from that donor! Having been a very senior buyer for a large corporation it was drummed into you - there’s no such thing as a free lunch!

Set an example so he should the smarmy p rick

We do have to get over privilege Al. His kids will have a more privileged life than yours and yours had a more privileged life than most. It’s the way it is.