"For our English and Maths exam, we needed 77 rooms! 54 rooms for individuals to sit alone.. they are saying they are too anxious to take the exam in a room with everyone else"
And when they get into the workforce....
They won't get into the workforce they will be claiming pip
Interesting piece in NY Times arguing that SCOTUS just made the right call on judicial decisions as national injunctions.
"In rejecting the concept of the universal injunction, the Supreme Court reaffirmed the proper role of the federal courts within our constitutional system."
I’m sitting on the waterfront at Oslo watching the floating saunas - which look like sheds on a raft - buzzing about. It seems a popular way to spend a couple of hours.
Sounds much better than Heathrow.
Given that my new replacement flight is now late, which potentially means a missed connection in Frankfurt, and an even greater clusterfucktacular, yes, I’d say @IanB2 is in the nicer place
Today (forecast, and developing) and yesterday have also been what they here call ‘tropical evenings’ - rare evenings of 20C plus, when it seems like the whole city comes out to eat and drink in the sunshine…
Meanwhile, in "Brenda from Bristol would have something to say about this" news,
🔺 EXCLUSIVE: Ex-Tory minister George Freeman refers himself to parliamentary watchdog after leaked emails reveal he was paid by a company that helped him write questions to government
The next scandal will be MPs using ChatGPT to draft questions (and ministers to draft answers).
I’m sure it’s already happening. It’s becoming notable in my workplace.
And it’s sad, and ultimately cretinizing.
I had occasion to look up the difference between I will/I shall on Google the other day. The AI now just suggests that I shall is merely a British variant…
'Aft'noon pb from Greenhead, Northumberland. I am attempting to cycle from coast to coast of England - from Rockcliffe, near Carlisle, where the Eden turns tidal to Wylam, Northumberland, where the Tyne turns tidal. If things go very well I may continue to Newcastle. If things go badly I may get a train earlier. I'm sure a dozen pb-ers have done bigger and better rides, but if all goes to plan this will be the furthest I have ridden in a day. The weather is mizzly and I have a cold and a bad back. But opportunities of a day to myself are few and far between and must be seized when they crop up. Anyway, all this is by way of introduction to something I saw just west of Gilsland: 100 dead rats hung from a fence; the heavy smell of death echoing the bleakness of the setting. Why, for God's sake? A warning to other rats?
I bet it's quite nice up here in the sun.
It’s a local delicacy. Rodent biltong. They hang the rats up to dry. They then make the bilton from the,m.
It’s not as nice as beef biltong but it’s okay.
There’s a nice pub by the level crossing in Wylam.
Worth having a jar. During Covid when we went for a walk there I’d get a milk carton of Jakehead for the walk back to the car.
When Johnson saw Walter Cronkite's damning report from Khe Sanh, he apparently said "if I've lost Cronkite I've just lost middle-America". If Starmer has lost John Rentoul, it really is all over.
I think I was one of the first to spot that he was a diabolical combination of uncharismatic berk and sociopathic liar.
The truth is there are fewer Labour supporters under Starmer than there have been for years. This was so even at the time of the last election. The right splitting between Tory, Reform and Stay at Home and a quirk of our Electoral system just gave Labour spinners the opportunity to pretend Sir Keir was really popular.
Think I’ve said this before, but it’s like a team winning the Premier League on 57 points by winning every home game 1-0, losing every away game 5-0 while every other match in the season was a draw. They’d win the league by 18 points, and that could be spun as some kind of impressive feat if you ignored the fact they’d lost half their matches, had a negative goal difference and won the league with the lowest points total of any champions in history.
And yet, they still get their name engraved on the trophy.
Two things can be true at once. One is that Starmer is not a Great PM. The reason that Starmer Fans never popped up to explain his poor polling is that there aren't (m)any.
The other is that the options proffered by other parties are obviously, visibly even worse. See the head-to-head polling on preferred PM; SKS wins each one fairly comfortably, despite everything. But "none of the above/someone else" generally does even better.
"Vote Starmer. He'll have to do, because the others are even worse." Not an inspiring slogan, but it's won once and may well win again. All those who would like something else have to do is find something inspiring and credible to put up against him as an alternative. It's that simple, but it also seems to be that impossible.
This is not actually true
C4’s Dispatches about Farage by Fraser Nelson had a Survation poll where Farage topped the list as preferred PM
No one scored highly. But Farage scored highest
That's why I said head-to-head.
Reform and Farage do have the biggest single slice of the electoral pie right now. But they are the second choice of very few. See the polling by YouGov;
Labour may be in a lacklustre second place in the voting intention polls, and suffering from low approval ratings, but when the public are offered the choice of Keir Starmer or Nigel Farage as prime minister, the incumbent holds a commanding lead over the challenger by 44% to 29%.
Without a decent wedge of "I don't like X, but I want to stop Y" votes, Reform are currently on "not enough". FPTP has always been a mixture of positive and negative votes, and having five parties turns that effect up to 11.
I predict even Starmer’s head to head performance will crater over time. Indeed it will get so bad he will step down
Moreover the Tories are inevitably going to replace Badenoch. If they have the sense to install Jenrick - energetic, clever, ruthless, tiny, good at social media - he could also prosper against the lifeless pathetic Sir Keir Traitor
Jenrick would take more votes from Farage than Starmer
For gods sake tell them to choose Jenrick. He’s your only hope. The only Tory with ideas and vigour and chutzpah
If you choose cleverly or stride or whatever you are accepting terminal decline and irrelevance
Indeed: Jenrick could rescue the Conservatives. He's telegenic, vigarous, youthful (without appearing to still be an undergraduate), and can appeal to at least some Reform supporters, without scaring off traditional Conservatives.
Yes exactly
He’s the only one that makes you sit up and think OK perhaps he will do something. Maybe I’ll give them another shot
He’s proved that with Jenrickvision. The fact he alienates the lefty centrist dad Lib Dem Tories is an ADVANTAGE. They are the people who will lead the Tories into oblivion - they’ve already taken them halfway there
I always thought Badenoch would be useless, but she is the right choice if the only alternative is Jenrick. (Tory MPs- you are culpable here). He is just too dodgy personally, although I do recognise his strengths as you've outlined.
The other weakness to Jenrick is - if he's copying Reform, why not just vote for the real thing? And by fishing from the same pool he loses the centre without necessarily gaining anything in return.
If I was a Conservative I would be utterly depressed. Instead I'm watching with amazement as the most successful political party ever falls apart. I would laugh but the alternative is Farage and the chancers in Reform, and I never thought I would say this, so the Conservative party needs to survive somehow. Don't ask me how they do it.
The Conservatives *are* the real thing. The only reason Reform exists at all is because the Tories have been infested with Lib Dems who ran an aggressive campaign (and still are) to cleanse the party of any right-wing thought and turn it into the social democratic party: blue team. It is a farce that the same weasels now turn round and say 'we shouldn't ape reform'.
Try putting a description to 'Conservative' thought and policy right now that is 'right-wing' or 'non social democratic'. The answer has to clearly mark it out from Lab or LDs. It cannot be done.
I don't think it can be done with Reform either, but that is a work in progress.
Of course it can
It is the greatest mystery as to how the Tories evolved from the Thatcher version to the Boris Johnson one. The party lost touch with Mondeo Man massively. Key mistakes were made by people such as Jeremy Hunt, Pritti Patel and Sajid Javeed. It is hard to look back and come up with any positives from their last 5 years of government yet they still pretend they are the natural heirs to Labour. The alarm bells should be ringing much louder
Yet how many of the SPAD class are regretting throwing their lot in with Labour? The giant majority meant very few will get noticed for advancement. They'l just have to stay on lose their seat in four years. It will be Thing on their CVs. But then they will talk to the former Tory MPs who lost in 2024 - and discover it means damn all in the real world. Probably marks you down.
It must be difficult for those graduating with an Oxford PPE this summer and wondering which party to join for career advancement.
Meanwhile, in "Brenda from Bristol would have something to say about this" news,
🔺 EXCLUSIVE: Ex-Tory minister George Freeman refers himself to parliamentary watchdog after leaked emails reveal he was paid by a company that helped him write questions to government
The next scandal will be MPs using ChatGPT to draft questions (and ministers to draft answers).
I’m sure it’s already happening. It’s becoming notable in my workplace.
And it’s sad, and ultimately cretinizing.
I had occasion to look up the difference between I will/I shall on Google the other day. The AI now just suggests that I shall is merely a British variant…
Just bumped off a full plane at Heathrow. First time that’s happened in many years
I hope you managed to secure plenty of freebies.
They are grovelling. Offering new flight, compo, free biz class return, free hotel when I arrive
I don’t really care. The most annoying thing is that I got up at 5am for this fecking flight and now I won’t fly until 3pm
AAAAAAARGH
Normally when overbooked they ask for volunteers and then it is a game of who will take the bribe. Nobody took the request and you just got bumped off?
I was the only one bumped - right at the end. They didn’t realise they had to bump me until they looked at the screen with unhappy surprise and then went into a huddle
Luckily I am on 0.5mg Xanax and 200mg Slow Release Tramadol so I smiled benignly at the caprices of life, with only a tiny hint of disappointment in their performance. They were so gratified by my stoical understanding they then went into compensation overdrive
As an aside and actually being serious, I think most realise I am somewhat right of centre. I would have preferred a corbyn government right now to a starmer one....not because I agree with any of the policies but at least he would be doing something different to carrying on the policies of the last 40 years that have landed us in this mess.
Continuing policies that the last 40 years have shown don't work is insanity which is why lab, con, ld aren't worth voting for in the minds of most.....just carry on despite the last 40 years showing they don't work....yeah just fuck that.
Corbyn would have least have tried something different and maybe I am wrong in thinking he is wrong. But the main point is the status quo does not work for most so needs to change which is why I do intend to vote next election and will vote for the party offering change from the status quo that is most able to win be that green, reform, peace for gaza or whatever.....we need rid of the centrists and they need reducing to a comedy clown car level of mps
What did @StillWaters mean by his mother’s observation that Keir Starmer had an “interesting approach to money?”
I think Keir is very boring, very timid. But can we please accept too that he’s that quite rare thing in British high office: a lower middle class striver.
The last one was John Major. And before him, basically nobody.
A former Labour press officer talking about reaction to the working class Toolmaker’s son whose mother was ill’s soft soap relaunch propaganda with his biographer.
A few tweets from the real world about Starmer Earlier chatting to a friend and the chat turned to the interview where Starmer talked of clearing out his brother’s flat after his death My view is that almost everyone can empathise with the grief he must’ve felt and being PM adds to the difficulty of the situation The terror attacks on his and his wife’s property add to the awful situation … my friend said fine - I get all of that and one of the qualities I look for in any politician is that they understand and experience real stuff… I nodded
And then came “but I don’t want a PM I am asked to feel sorry for, it is almost as though in any difficult situation we hear a snippet of how difficult his life has been or is. It is starting to sound weird”
I hadn’t actually thought of it like that before but now I can’t get it out of my head
What did @StillWaters mean by his mother’s observation that Keir Starmer had an “interesting approach to money?”
I think Keir is very boring, very timid. But can we please accept too that he’s that quite rare thing in British high office: a lower middle class striver.
The last one was John Major. And before him, basically nobody.
Likes a freebie. When he was DPP he charged the taxpayer for a chauffeur driven car to take him to work and back when it was 20 mins on the tube
What did @StillWaters mean by his mother’s observation that Keir Starmer had an “interesting approach to money?”
I think Keir is very boring, very timid. But can we please accept too that he’s that quite rare thing in British high office: a lower middle class striver.
The last one was John Major. And before him, basically nobody.
Arguably Ted Heath too (who was borderline lower middle class/skilled working class by parentage) who also more matches Starmer's charmless personality and had an Oxford degree like Sir Keir but unlike Major who nonetheless had more charm than both.
Perhaps Callaghan and Wilson as well but the latter's background was more solidly middle class
What did @StillWaters mean by his mother’s observation that Keir Starmer had an “interesting approach to money?”
I think Keir is very boring, very timid. But can we please accept too that he’s that quite rare thing in British high office: a lower middle class striver.
The last one was John Major. And before him, basically nobody.
Likes a freebie. When he was DPP he charged the taxpayer for a chauffeur driven car to take him to work and back when it was 20 mins on the tube
Relative to Boris Johnson that sounds like Mother Theresa.
What did @StillWaters mean by his mother’s observation that Keir Starmer had an “interesting approach to money?”
I think Keir is very boring, very timid. But can we please accept too that he’s that quite rare thing in British high office: a lower middle class striver.
The last one was John Major. And before him, basically nobody.
Likes a freebie. When he was DPP he charged the taxpayer for a chauffeur driven car to take him to work and back when it was 20 mins on the tube
Which is exactly the problem....the higher ups aren't governed by the same rules the little people are. If I tried offsetting transport costs to work against tax HMRC would call foul....people like starmer get free luxury transport and don't if get charged for benefit in kind tax
What did @StillWaters mean by his mother’s observation that Keir Starmer had an “interesting approach to money?”
I think Keir is very boring, very timid. But can we please accept too that he’s that quite rare thing in British high office: a lower middle class striver.
The last one was John Major. And before him, basically nobody.
Likes a freebie. When he was DPP he charged the taxpayer for a chauffeur driven car to take him to work and back when it was 20 mins on the tube
Relative to Boris Johnson that sounds like Mother Theresa.
Boris wasn’t marketed as pious “Mr Rules” though, that’s the difference
What did @StillWaters mean by his mother’s observation that Keir Starmer had an “interesting approach to money?”
I think Keir is very boring, very timid. But can we please accept too that he’s that quite rare thing in British high office: a lower middle class striver.
The last one was John Major. And before him, basically nobody.
Likes a freebie. When he was DPP he charged the taxpayer for a chauffeur driven car to take him to work and back when it was 20 mins on the tube
As I understand it, he had to travel a lot inside the UK and the car was to facilitate that. No different I’d suggest to what I guess a Cabinet Minister has access to.
What did @StillWaters mean by his mother’s observation that Keir Starmer had an “interesting approach to money?”
I think Keir is very boring, very timid. But can we please accept too that he’s that quite rare thing in British high office: a lower middle class striver.
The last one was John Major. And before him, basically nobody.
Likes a freebie. When he was DPP he charged the taxpayer for a chauffeur driven car to take him to work and back when it was 20 mins on the tube
As I understand it, he had to travel a lot inside the UK and the car was to facilitate that. No different I’d suggest to what I guess a Cabinet Minister has access to.
Why does he not travel under hmrc rules for travel that applies to all companies?
What did @StillWaters mean by his mother’s observation that Keir Starmer had an “interesting approach to money?”
I think Keir is very boring, very timid. But can we please accept too that he’s that quite rare thing in British high office: a lower middle class striver.
The last one was John Major. And before him, basically nobody.
Likes a freebie. When he was DPP he charged the taxpayer for a chauffeur driven car to take him to work and back when it was 20 mins on the tube
As I understand it, he had to travel a lot inside the UK and the car was to facilitate that. No different I’d suggest to what I guess a Cabinet Minister has access to.
Why does he not travel under hmrc rules for travel that applies to all companies?
HMRC is not the authority on how public or private sector companies manage executive travel.
What did @StillWaters mean by his mother’s observation that Keir Starmer had an “interesting approach to money?”
I think Keir is very boring, very timid. But can we please accept too that he’s that quite rare thing in British high office: a lower middle class striver.
The last one was John Major. And before him, basically nobody.
Likes a freebie. When he was DPP he charged the taxpayer for a chauffeur driven car to take him to work and back when it was 20 mins on the tube
As I understand it, he had to travel a lot inside the UK and the car was to facilitate that. No different I’d suggest to what I guess a Cabinet Minister has access to.
“Keir Starmer billed taxpayers for nearly a quarter of a million pounds in travel costs while he was director of public prosecutions, it has been revealed.
The future Labour leader put nearly three times as much on expenses as his CPS successor Alison Saunders, including first class flights abroad and a chauffeur driven car.
Sir Keir charged taxpayers £161,273 for the vehicle and driver despite living just four miles and a direct Tube ride from the Crown Prosecution Service offices.
The car cost taxpayers an average of £1,920 a week for nearly two years until he stopped using it following embarrassing media reports.
Sir Keir served as Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) for five years from 2008-13.
His successor Alison Saunders, who was also DPP for five years, spent £67,340, less than a third of Sir Keir’s total.“
What did @StillWaters mean by his mother’s observation that Keir Starmer had an “interesting approach to money?”
I think Keir is very boring, very timid. But can we please accept too that he’s that quite rare thing in British high office: a lower middle class striver.
The last one was John Major. And before him, basically nobody.
Arguably Ted Heath too (who was borderline lower middle class/skilled working class by parentage) who also more matches Starmer's charmless personality and had an Oxford degree like Sir Keir but unlike Major who nonetheless had more charm than both.
Perhaps Callaghan and Wilson as well but the latter's background was more solidly middle class
Ah yes. For some reason, forgot Heath and Callaghan…and Thatcher!
What did @StillWaters mean by his mother’s observation that Keir Starmer had an “interesting approach to money?”
I think Keir is very boring, very timid. But can we please accept too that he’s that quite rare thing in British high office: a lower middle class striver.
The last one was John Major. And before him, basically nobody.
Likes a freebie. When he was DPP he charged the taxpayer for a chauffeur driven car to take him to work and back when it was 20 mins on the tube
As I understand it, he had to travel a lot inside the UK and the car was to facilitate that. No different I’d suggest to what I guess a Cabinet Minister has access to.
Why does he not travel under hmrc rules for travel that applies to all companies?
HMRC is not the authority on how public or private sector companies manage executive travel.
Indeed, any company can offer transportation for their employees.
What did @StillWaters mean by his mother’s observation that Keir Starmer had an “interesting approach to money?”
I think Keir is very boring, very timid. But can we please accept too that he’s that quite rare thing in British high office: a lower middle class striver.
The last one was John Major. And before him, basically nobody.
Likes a freebie. When he was DPP he charged the taxpayer for a chauffeur driven car to take him to work and back when it was 20 mins on the tube
As I understand it, he had to travel a lot inside the UK and the car was to facilitate that. No different I’d suggest to what I guess a Cabinet Minister has access to.
“Keir Starmer billed taxpayers for nearly a quarter of a million pounds in travel costs while he was director of public prosecutions, it has been revealed.
The future Labour leader put nearly three times as much on expenses as his CPS successor Alison Saunders, including first class flights abroad and a chauffeur driven car.
Sir Keir charged taxpayers £161,273 for the vehicle and driver despite living just four miles and a direct Tube ride from the Crown Prosecution Service offices.
The car cost taxpayers an average of £1,920 a week for nearly two years until he stopped using it following embarrassing media reports.”
Meanwhile, in "Brenda from Bristol would have something to say about this" news,
🔺 EXCLUSIVE: Ex-Tory minister George Freeman refers himself to parliamentary watchdog after leaked emails reveal he was paid by a company that helped him write questions to government
The next scandal will be MPs using ChatGPT to draft questions (and ministers to draft answers).
I’m sure it’s already happening. It’s becoming notable in my workplace.
And it’s sad, and ultimately cretinizing.
I had occasion to look up the difference between I will/I shall on Google the other day. The AI now just suggests that I shall is merely a British variant…
Which as he also suggest means the 'Brahmin' Corbynista left will likely soon make a comeback amongst graduates in Remain heavy areas if professional and graduate jobs get increasingly automated. With a graduate backlash towards higher taxes on the wealthy managerial class who have kept their jobs and for more public spending to create more graduate secure jobs to replace those lost in the private sector and for more welfare in the meantime
What did @StillWaters mean by his mother’s observation that Keir Starmer had an “interesting approach to money?”
I think Keir is very boring, very timid. But can we please accept too that he’s that quite rare thing in British high office: a lower middle class striver.
The last one was John Major. And before him, basically nobody.
Likes a freebie. When he was DPP he charged the taxpayer for a chauffeur driven car to take him to work and back when it was 20 mins on the tube
As I understand it, he had to travel a lot inside the UK and the car was to facilitate that. No different I’d suggest to what I guess a Cabinet Minister has access to.
“Keir Starmer billed taxpayers for nearly a quarter of a million pounds in travel costs while he was director of public prosecutions, it has been revealed.
The future Labour leader put nearly three times as much on expenses as his CPS successor Alison Saunders, including first class flights abroad and a chauffeur driven car.
Sir Keir charged taxpayers £161,273 for the vehicle and driver despite living just four miles and a direct Tube ride from the Crown Prosecution Service offices.
The car cost taxpayers an average of £1,920 a week for nearly two years until he stopped using it following embarrassing media reports.
Sir Keir served as Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) for five years from 2008-13.
His successor Alison Saunders, who was also DPP for five years, spent £67,340, less than a third of Sir Keir’s total.“
What did @StillWaters mean by his mother’s observation that Keir Starmer had an “interesting approach to money?”
I think Keir is very boring, very timid. But can we please accept too that he’s that quite rare thing in British high office: a lower middle class striver.
The last one was John Major. And before him, basically nobody.
Likes a freebie. When he was DPP he charged the taxpayer for a chauffeur driven car to take him to work and back when it was 20 mins on the tube
As I understand it, he had to travel a lot inside the UK and the car was to facilitate that. No different I’d suggest to what I guess a Cabinet Minister has access to.
Why does he not travel under hmrc rules for travel that applies to all companies?
HMRC is not the authority on how public or private sector companies manage executive travel.
Actually it is for private sector....if you are going to the office its taxable as a benefit in kind. Only travel from home office to places the company requires you to visit is non taxable as a benefit in kind. He was using his chauffeur driven car to get from the home to his home office. That would be taxable for any private sector employee executive or not
What did @StillWaters mean by his mother’s observation that Keir Starmer had an “interesting approach to money?”
I think Keir is very boring, very timid. But can we please accept too that he’s that quite rare thing in British high office: a lower middle class striver.
The last one was John Major. And before him, basically nobody.
Likes a freebie. When he was DPP he charged the taxpayer for a chauffeur driven car to take him to work and back when it was 20 mins on the tube
As I understand it, he had to travel a lot inside the UK and the car was to facilitate that. No different I’d suggest to what I guess a Cabinet Minister has access to.
Why does he not travel under hmrc rules for travel that applies to all companies?
HMRC is not the authority on how public or private sector companies manage executive travel.
Actually it is for private sector....if you are going to the office its taxable as a benefit in kind. Only travel from home office to places the company requires you to visit is non taxable as a benefit in kind. He was using his chauffeur driven car to get from the home to his home office. That would be taxable for any private sector employee executive or not
If you dig into it, he used it (whether predominantly or not) to get around the UK for work purposes.
What did @StillWaters mean by his mother’s observation that Keir Starmer had an “interesting approach to money?”
I think Keir is very boring, very timid. But can we please accept too that he’s that quite rare thing in British high office: a lower middle class striver.
The last one was John Major. And before him, basically nobody.
Likes a freebie. When he was DPP he charged the taxpayer for a chauffeur driven car to take him to work and back when it was 20 mins on the tube
As I understand it, he had to travel a lot inside the UK and the car was to facilitate that. No different I’d suggest to what I guess a Cabinet Minister has access to.
Why does he not travel under hmrc rules for travel that applies to all companies?
HMRC is not the authority on how public or private sector companies manage executive travel.
Indeed, any company can offer transportation for their employees.
Not though from home to home office...that is taxable
When Johnson saw Walter Cronkite's damning report from Khe Sanh, he apparently said "if I've lost Cronkite I've just lost middle-America". If Starmer has lost John Rentoul, it really is all over.
I think I was one of the first to spot that he was a diabolical combination of uncharismatic berk and sociopathic liar.
The truth is there are fewer Labour supporters under Starmer than there have been for years. This was so even at the time of the last election. The right splitting between Tory, Reform and Stay at Home and a quirk of our Electoral system just gave Labour spinners the opportunity to pretend Sir Keir was really popular.
Think I’ve said this before, but it’s like a team winning the Premier League on 57 points by winning every home game 1-0, losing every away game 5-0 while every other match in the season was a draw. They’d win the league by 18 points, and that could be spun as some kind of impressive feat if you ignored the fact they’d lost half their matches, had a negative goal difference and won the league with the lowest points total of any champions in history.
And yet, they still get their name engraved on the trophy.
Two things can be true at once. One is that Starmer is not a Great PM. The reason that Starmer Fans never popped up to explain his poor polling is that there aren't (m)any.
The other is that the options proffered by other parties are obviously, visibly even worse. See the head-to-head polling on preferred PM; SKS wins each one fairly comfortably, despite everything. But "none of the above/someone else" generally does even better.
"Vote Starmer. He'll have to do, because the others are even worse." Not an inspiring slogan, but it's won once and may well win again. All those who would like something else have to do is find something inspiring and credible to put up against him as an alternative. It's that simple, but it also seems to be that impossible.
This is not actually true
C4’s Dispatches about Farage by Fraser Nelson had a Survation poll where Farage topped the list as preferred PM
No one scored highly. But Farage scored highest
That's why I said head-to-head.
Reform and Farage do have the biggest single slice of the electoral pie right now. But they are the second choice of very few. See the polling by YouGov;
Labour may be in a lacklustre second place in the voting intention polls, and suffering from low approval ratings, but when the public are offered the choice of Keir Starmer or Nigel Farage as prime minister, the incumbent holds a commanding lead over the challenger by 44% to 29%.
Without a decent wedge of "I don't like X, but I want to stop Y" votes, Reform are currently on "not enough". FPTP has always been a mixture of positive and negative votes, and having five parties turns that effect up to 11.
I predict even Starmer’s head to head performance will crater over time. Indeed it will get so bad he will step down
Moreover the Tories are inevitably going to replace Badenoch. If they have the sense to install Jenrick - energetic, clever, ruthless, tiny, good at social media - he could also prosper against the lifeless pathetic Sir Keir Traitor
Jenrick would take more votes from Farage than Starmer
For gods sake tell them to choose Jenrick. He’s your only hope. The only Tory with ideas and vigour and chutzpah
If you choose cleverly or stride or whatever you are accepting terminal decline and irrelevance
Indeed: Jenrick could rescue the Conservatives. He's telegenic, vigarous, youthful (without appearing to still be an undergraduate), and can appeal to at least some Reform supporters, without scaring off traditional Conservatives.
Yes exactly
He’s the only one that makes you sit up and think OK perhaps he will do something. Maybe I’ll give them another shot
He’s proved that with Jenrickvision. The fact he alienates the lefty centrist dad Lib Dem Tories is an ADVANTAGE. They are the people who will lead the Tories into oblivion - they’ve already taken them halfway there
I always thought Badenoch would be useless, but she is the right choice if the only alternative is Jenrick. (Tory MPs- you are culpable here). He is just too dodgy personally, although I do recognise his strengths as you've outlined.
The other weakness to Jenrick is - if he's copying Reform, why not just vote for the real thing? And by fishing from the same pool he loses the centre without necessarily gaining anything in return.
If I was a Conservative I would be utterly depressed. Instead I'm watching with amazement as the most successful political party ever falls apart. I would laugh but the alternative is Farage and the chancers in Reform, and I never thought I would say this, so the Conservative party needs to survive somehow. Don't ask me how they do it.
The Conservatives *are* the real thing. The only reason Reform exists at all is because the Tories have been infested with Lib Dems who ran an aggressive campaign (and still are) to cleanse the party of any right-wing thought and turn it into the social democratic party: blue team. It is a farce that the same weasels now turn round and say 'we shouldn't ape reform'.
Try putting a description to 'Conservative' thought and policy right now that is 'right-wing' or 'non social democratic'. The answer has to clearly mark it out from Lab or LDs. It cannot be done.
I don't think it can be done with Reform either, but that is a work in progress.
Of course it can
It is the greatest mystery as to how the Tories evolved from the Thatcher version to the Boris Johnson one. The party lost touch with Mondeo Man massively. Key mistakes were made by people such as Jeremy Hunt, Pritti Patel and Sajid Javeed. It is hard to look back and come up with any positives from their last 5 years of government yet they still pretend they are the natural heirs to Labour. The alarm bells should be ringing much louder
Boris got the highest Tory voteshare since Thatcher and swept the Mondeo Man vote, it was Truss, Rishi and now Kemi who have lost it, particularly to Reform
What did @StillWaters mean by his mother’s observation that Keir Starmer had an “interesting approach to money?”
I think Keir is very boring, very timid. But can we please accept too that he’s that quite rare thing in British high office: a lower middle class striver.
The last one was John Major. And before him, basically nobody.
Likes a freebie. When he was DPP he charged the taxpayer for a chauffeur driven car to take him to work and back when it was 20 mins on the tube
As I understand it, he had to travel a lot inside the UK and the car was to facilitate that. No different I’d suggest to what I guess a Cabinet Minister has access to.
Why does he not travel under hmrc rules for travel that applies to all companies?
HMRC is not the authority on how public or private sector companies manage executive travel.
Indeed, any company can offer transportation for their employees.
Not though from home to home office...that is taxable
And we know that aspect of the expense wasn’t taxed?
What did @StillWaters mean by his mother’s observation that Keir Starmer had an “interesting approach to money?”
I think Keir is very boring, very timid. But can we please accept too that he’s that quite rare thing in British high office: a lower middle class striver.
The last one was John Major. And before him, basically nobody.
Likes a freebie. When he was DPP he charged the taxpayer for a chauffeur driven car to take him to work and back when it was 20 mins on the tube
As I understand it, he had to travel a lot inside the UK and the car was to facilitate that. No different I’d suggest to what I guess a Cabinet Minister has access to.
“Keir Starmer billed taxpayers for nearly a quarter of a million pounds in travel costs while he was director of public prosecutions, it has been revealed.
The future Labour leader put nearly three times as much on expenses as his CPS successor Alison Saunders, including first class flights abroad and a chauffeur driven car.
Sir Keir charged taxpayers £161,273 for the vehicle and driver despite living just four miles and a direct Tube ride from the Crown Prosecution Service offices.
The car cost taxpayers an average of £1,920 a week for nearly two years until he stopped using it following embarrassing media reports.
Sir Keir served as Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) for five years from 2008-13.
His successor Alison Saunders, who was also DPP for five years, spent £67,340, less than a third of Sir Keir’s total.“
Perhaps Saunders adopted a more ascetic approach, following said news reports.
I don’t really see a smoking gun here. British public life tends to the punitively spartan if you ask me.
You asked about his “interesting approach to money”, and there are instances from his time as DPP and PM of him indulging himself with other people’s money. Seemed relevant to me, no one said it was a smoking gun
When Johnson saw Walter Cronkite's damning report from Khe Sanh, he apparently said "if I've lost Cronkite I've just lost middle-America". If Starmer has lost John Rentoul, it really is all over.
I think I was one of the first to spot that he was a diabolical combination of uncharismatic berk and sociopathic liar.
The truth is there are fewer Labour supporters under Starmer than there have been for years. This was so even at the time of the last election. The right splitting between Tory, Reform and Stay at Home and a quirk of our Electoral system just gave Labour spinners the opportunity to pretend Sir Keir was really popular.
Think I’ve said this before, but it’s like a team winning the Premier League on 57 points by winning every home game 1-0, losing every away game 5-0 while every other match in the season was a draw. They’d win the league by 18 points, and that could be spun as some kind of impressive feat if you ignored the fact they’d lost half their matches, had a negative goal difference and won the league with the lowest points total of any champions in history.
And yet, they still get their name engraved on the trophy.
Two things can be true at once. One is that Starmer is not a Great PM. The reason that Starmer Fans never popped up to explain his poor polling is that there aren't (m)any.
The other is that the options proffered by other parties are obviously, visibly even worse. See the head-to-head polling on preferred PM; SKS wins each one fairly comfortably, despite everything. But "none of the above/someone else" generally does even better.
"Vote Starmer. He'll have to do, because the others are even worse." Not an inspiring slogan, but it's won once and may well win again. All those who would like something else have to do is find something inspiring and credible to put up against him as an alternative. It's that simple, but it also seems to be that impossible.
This is not actually true
C4’s Dispatches about Farage by Fraser Nelson had a Survation poll where Farage topped the list as preferred PM
No one scored highly. But Farage scored highest
That's why I said head-to-head.
Reform and Farage do have the biggest single slice of the electoral pie right now. But they are the second choice of very few. See the polling by YouGov;
Labour may be in a lacklustre second place in the voting intention polls, and suffering from low approval ratings, but when the public are offered the choice of Keir Starmer or Nigel Farage as prime minister, the incumbent holds a commanding lead over the challenger by 44% to 29%.
Without a decent wedge of "I don't like X, but I want to stop Y" votes, Reform are currently on "not enough". FPTP has always been a mixture of positive and negative votes, and having five parties turns that effect up to 11.
I predict even Starmer’s head to head performance will crater over time. Indeed it will get so bad he will step down
Moreover the Tories are inevitably going to replace Badenoch. If they have the sense to install Jenrick - energetic, clever, ruthless, tiny, good at social media - he could also prosper against the lifeless pathetic Sir Keir Traitor
Jenrick would take more votes from Farage than Starmer
For gods sake tell them to choose Jenrick. He’s your only hope. The only Tory with ideas and vigour and chutzpah
If you choose cleverly or stride or whatever you are accepting terminal decline and irrelevance
Indeed: Jenrick could rescue the Conservatives. He's telegenic, vigarous, youthful (without appearing to still be an undergraduate), and can appeal to at least some Reform supporters, without scaring off traditional Conservatives.
Yes exactly
He’s the only one that makes you sit up and think OK perhaps he will do something. Maybe I’ll give them another shot
He’s proved that with Jenrickvision. The fact he alienates the lefty centrist dad Lib Dem Tories is an ADVANTAGE. They are the people who will lead the Tories into oblivion - they’ve already taken them halfway there
I always thought Badenoch would be useless, but she is the right choice if the only alternative is Jenrick. (Tory MPs- you are culpable here). He is just too dodgy personally, although I do recognise his strengths as you've outlined.
The other weakness to Jenrick is - if he's copying Reform, why not just vote for the real thing? And by fishing from the same pool he loses the centre without necessarily gaining anything in return.
If I was a Conservative I would be utterly depressed. Instead I'm watching with amazement as the most successful political party ever falls apart. I would laugh but the alternative is Farage and the chancers in Reform, and I never thought I would say this, so the Conservative party needs to survive somehow. Don't ask me how they do it.
The Conservatives *are* the real thing. The only reason Reform exists at all is because the Tories have been infested with Lib Dems who ran an aggressive campaign (and still are) to cleanse the party of any right-wing thought and turn it into the social democratic party: blue team. It is a farce that the same weasels now turn round and say 'we shouldn't ape reform'.
Try putting a description to 'Conservative' thought and policy right now that is 'right-wing' or 'non social democratic'. The answer has to clearly mark it out from Lab or LDs. It cannot be done.
I don't think it can be done with Reform either, but that is a work in progress.
Of course it can
It is the greatest mystery as to how the Tories evolved from the Thatcher version to the Boris Johnson one. The party lost touch with Mondeo Man massively. Key mistakes were made by people such as Jeremy Hunt, Pritti Patel and Sajid Javeed. It is hard to look back and come up with any positives from their last 5 years of government yet they still pretend they are the natural heirs to Labour. The alarm bells should be ringing much louder
Yet how many of the SPAD class are regretting throwing their lot in with Labour? The giant majority meant very few will get noticed for advancement. They'l just have to stay on lose their seat in four years. It will be Thing on their CVs. But then they will talk to the former Tory MPs who lost in 2024 - and discover it means damn all in the real world. Probably marks you down.
Unless you get a job with a think tank, in PR or consultancy or research but not that many there
Just bumped off a full plane at Heathrow. First time that’s happened in many years
I hope you managed to secure plenty of freebies.
They are grovelling. Offering new flight, compo, free biz class return, free hotel when I arrive
I don’t really care. The most annoying thing is that I got up at 5am for this fecking flight and now I won’t fly until 3pm
AAAAAAARGH
Unlucky! The one time I was nearly bumped they offered me a flight in the jump seat (it was that long ago!) and I had a brilliant ride into Heathrow!
What is a “jump seat”??
It's extra fold out seat in the cockpit.
I doubt they ever offer that to anybody these days given terrorism concerns.
I got to go in the cockpit of a Virgin Atlantic 747 at 38,000 feet on 12 August 2001. Reckon I was one of the last to have that pleasure.
More innocent times...
As a teenager in the 1950s, I was invited into the signal box at Scremerston (just outside Berwick) and allowed to signal the actual 'Flying Scotsman' steam engine through on it's way to Edinburgh
I didn't realise just how much effort was required to pull the levers
It is a lifetime memory unavailable these days
Thanks to a kindly driver who saw me taking pics of his train, I managed to get a cab ride in the old A-Stock underground trains on the last day of East London Line operations in December 2007. That was when they converted the East London to London Overground, re-opening in 2010.
Obviously since he was DPP, he has become very frugal with other peoples money and never takes a freebie.....
I bet Chez Starmer bathroom is jammed full of tiny bottles of showergel and shampoo he has brought back with him from all the hotels he has been staying in over the last 11 months.
What did @StillWaters mean by his mother’s observation that Keir Starmer had an “interesting approach to money?”
I think Keir is very boring, very timid. But can we please accept too that he’s that quite rare thing in British high office: a lower middle class striver.
The last one was John Major. And before him, basically nobody.
Likes a freebie. When he was DPP he charged the taxpayer for a chauffeur driven car to take him to work and back when it was 20 mins on the tube
As I understand it, he had to travel a lot inside the UK and the car was to facilitate that. No different I’d suggest to what I guess a Cabinet Minister has access to.
Why does he not travel under hmrc rules for travel that applies to all companies?
HMRC is not the authority on how public or private sector companies manage executive travel.
Indeed, any company can offer transportation for their employees.
Not though from home to home office...that is taxable
And we know that aspect of the expense wasn’t taxed?
Indeed, and in fact nowhere does the article actually state whether the car was used for home to office journeys. I would presume that it was, as it was available, however we have no way of knowing whether that aspect of it was treated as a taxable expense, or if SKS reimbursed his employers. Or how you might even seek to separate out the taxable benefit part.
What did @StillWaters mean by his mother’s observation that Keir Starmer had an “interesting approach to money?”
I think Keir is very boring, very timid. But can we please accept too that he’s that quite rare thing in British high office: a lower middle class striver.
The last one was John Major. And before him, basically nobody.
Likes a freebie. When he was DPP he charged the taxpayer for a chauffeur driven car to take him to work and back when it was 20 mins on the tube
As I understand it, he had to travel a lot inside the UK and the car was to facilitate that. No different I’d suggest to what I guess a Cabinet Minister has access to.
Why does he not travel under hmrc rules for travel that applies to all companies?
HMRC is not the authority on how public or private sector companies manage executive travel.
Actually it is for private sector....if you are going to the office its taxable as a benefit in kind. Only travel from home office to places the company requires you to visit is non taxable as a benefit in kind. He was using his chauffeur driven car to get from the home to his home office. That would be taxable for any private sector employee executive or not
If you dig into it, he used it (whether predominantly or not) to get around the UK for work purposes.
He may well have done but he also used it to get from home to the home office, from experience I know hmrc expect their tax from that if you aren't one of the high and mighty. I had a company car once, they insisted I account for mileage that was work related vs mileage for personal usage which included getting to the office. Even if I was example going to say manchester and was going straight from home they would only accept the miles from home office to my destination not from where I set off...naturally only if the miles from home office was higher...no rebate if going straight from home was smaller
How does Starmer come back from all of this? I do not see a route. There is literally no returning
Unless he gets some weird Falklands black swan, the British public have decided they despise him and that’s that. What’s worse - it looks like most of his MPs and half his cabinet despise him as well
I'm not sure he's long for the job. If things haven't improved by 2026, they'll start to panic (these aren't a strong and stable cohort of MPs, on recent evidence).
Of course, that then begs the question who comes after him. Quite difficult to see beyond Our Ange (who brings with her, her own baggage). Streeting is too Blairite for them and Reeves has ruined her political career.
Can we write off Cooper? She seems to have avoided being in the headlines as Home Secretary, which is about as good as it gets for a role where if you are in the news it's only ever for bad news. Personally I'm not keen on her but looking around at the alternatives...
Cooper or Rayner would be favourites to replace Starmer if he went, unless Burnham was back as an MP
What did @StillWaters mean by his mother’s observation that Keir Starmer had an “interesting approach to money?”
I think Keir is very boring, very timid. But can we please accept too that he’s that quite rare thing in British high office: a lower middle class striver.
The last one was John Major. And before him, basically nobody.
When Johnson saw Walter Cronkite's damning report from Khe Sanh, he apparently said "if I've lost Cronkite I've just lost middle-America". If Starmer has lost John Rentoul, it really is all over.
I think I was one of the first to spot that he was a diabolical combination of uncharismatic berk and sociopathic liar.
The truth is there are fewer Labour supporters under Starmer than there have been for years. This was so even at the time of the last election. The right splitting between Tory, Reform and Stay at Home and a quirk of our Electoral system just gave Labour spinners the opportunity to pretend Sir Keir was really popular.
Think I’ve said this before, but it’s like a team winning the Premier League on 57 points by winning every home game 1-0, losing every away game 5-0 while every other match in the season was a draw. They’d win the league by 18 points, and that could be spun as some kind of impressive feat if you ignored the fact they’d lost half their matches, had a negative goal difference and won the league with the lowest points total of any champions in history.
And yet, they still get their name engraved on the trophy.
Two things can be true at once. One is that Starmer is not a Great PM. The reason that Starmer Fans never popped up to explain his poor polling is that there aren't (m)any.
The other is that the options proffered by other parties are obviously, visibly even worse. See the head-to-head polling on preferred PM; SKS wins each one fairly comfortably, despite everything. But "none of the above/someone else" generally does even better.
"Vote Starmer. He'll have to do, because the others are even worse." Not an inspiring slogan, but it's won once and may well win again. All those who would like something else have to do is find something inspiring and credible to put up against him as an alternative. It's that simple, but it also seems to be that impossible.
This is not actually true
C4’s Dispatches about Farage by Fraser Nelson had a Survation poll where Farage topped the list as preferred PM
No one scored highly. But Farage scored highest
That's why I said head-to-head.
Reform and Farage do have the biggest single slice of the electoral pie right now. But they are the second choice of very few. See the polling by YouGov;
Labour may be in a lacklustre second place in the voting intention polls, and suffering from low approval ratings, but when the public are offered the choice of Keir Starmer or Nigel Farage as prime minister, the incumbent holds a commanding lead over the challenger by 44% to 29%.
Without a decent wedge of "I don't like X, but I want to stop Y" votes, Reform are currently on "not enough". FPTP has always been a mixture of positive and negative votes, and having five parties turns that effect up to 11.
I predict even Starmer’s head to head performance will crater over time. Indeed it will get so bad he will step down
Moreover the Tories are inevitably going to replace Badenoch. If they have the sense to install Jenrick - energetic, clever, ruthless, tiny, good at social media - he could also prosper against the lifeless pathetic Sir Keir Traitor
Jenrick would take more votes from Farage than Starmer
For gods sake tell them to choose Jenrick. He’s your only hope. The only Tory with ideas and vigour and chutzpah
If you choose cleverly or stride or whatever you are accepting terminal decline and irrelevance
Cleverly or Stride can at least pitch for centrist swing voters more than Kemi and there is little polling evidence Jenrick would win back many Farage voters
What did @StillWaters mean by his mother’s observation that Keir Starmer had an “interesting approach to money?”
I think Keir is very boring, very timid. But can we please accept too that he’s that quite rare thing in British high office: a lower middle class striver.
The last one was John Major. And before him, basically nobody.
Likes a freebie. When he was DPP he charged the taxpayer for a chauffeur driven car to take him to work and back when it was 20 mins on the tube
As I understand it, he had to travel a lot inside the UK and the car was to facilitate that. No different I’d suggest to what I guess a Cabinet Minister has access to.
Why does he not travel under hmrc rules for travel that applies to all companies?
HMRC is not the authority on how public or private sector companies manage executive travel.
Indeed, any company can offer transportation for their employees.
Not though from home to home office...that is taxable
And we know that aspect of the expense wasn’t taxed?
Do we have any evidence it was? Lets face it mp's and high muckety mucks seem to get away without paying a lot of shit the rest of us are taxed on frankly.....this is a man with a tax free pension from being dpp for fucks sake...you really think he was paying tax on this perk?
What did @StillWaters mean by his mother’s observation that Keir Starmer had an “interesting approach to money?”
I think Keir is very boring, very timid. But can we please accept too that he’s that quite rare thing in British high office: a lower middle class striver.
The last one was John Major. And before him, basically nobody.
Likes a freebie. When he was DPP he charged the taxpayer for a chauffeur driven car to take him to work and back when it was 20 mins on the tube
As I understand it, he had to travel a lot inside the UK and the car was to facilitate that. No different I’d suggest to what I guess a Cabinet Minister has access to.
Why does he not travel under hmrc rules for travel that applies to all companies?
HMRC is not the authority on how public or private sector companies manage executive travel.
Indeed, any company can offer transportation for their employees.
Not though from home to home office...that is taxable
And we know that aspect of the expense wasn’t taxed?
Do we have any evidence it was? Lets face it mp's and high muckety mucks seem to get away without paying a lot of shit the rest of us are taxed on frankly.....this is a man with a tax free pension from being dpp for fucks sake...you really think he was paying tax on this perk?
Oh, come off it. If you are making the accusation the onus is on you.
Obviously since he was DPP, he has become very frugal with other peoples money and never takes a freebie.....
I bet Chez Starmer bathroom is jammed full of tiny bottles of showergel and shampoo he has brought back with him from all the hotels he has been staying in over the last 11 months.
That reminds me of a lawyer I knew who, though extremely honourable and generous in virtually every way, for some reason stockpiled those foil-wrapped pats of butter you get in restaurants. His fridge had hundreds of them.
When Johnson saw Walter Cronkite's damning report from Khe Sanh, he apparently said "if I've lost Cronkite I've just lost middle-America". If Starmer has lost John Rentoul, it really is all over.
I think I was one of the first to spot that he was a diabolical combination of uncharismatic berk and sociopathic liar.
The truth is there are fewer Labour supporters under Starmer than there have been for years. This was so even at the time of the last election. The right splitting between Tory, Reform and Stay at Home and a quirk of our Electoral system just gave Labour spinners the opportunity to pretend Sir Keir was really popular.
Think I’ve said this before, but it’s like a team winning the Premier League on 57 points by winning every home game 1-0, losing every away game 5-0 while every other match in the season was a draw. They’d win the league by 18 points, and that could be spun as some kind of impressive feat if you ignored the fact they’d lost half their matches, had a negative goal difference and won the league with the lowest points total of any champions in history.
And yet, they still get their name engraved on the trophy.
Two things can be true at once. One is that Starmer is not a Great PM. The reason that Starmer Fans never popped up to explain his poor polling is that there aren't (m)any.
The other is that the options proffered by other parties are obviously, visibly even worse. See the head-to-head polling on preferred PM; SKS wins each one fairly comfortably, despite everything. But "none of the above/someone else" generally does even better.
"Vote Starmer. He'll have to do, because the others are even worse." Not an inspiring slogan, but it's won once and may well win again. All those who would like something else have to do is find something inspiring and credible to put up against him as an alternative. It's that simple, but it also seems to be that impossible.
This is not actually true
C4’s Dispatches about Farage by Fraser Nelson had a Survation poll where Farage topped the list as preferred PM
No one scored highly. But Farage scored highest
That's why I said head-to-head.
Reform and Farage do have the biggest single slice of the electoral pie right now. But they are the second choice of very few. See the polling by YouGov;
Labour may be in a lacklustre second place in the voting intention polls, and suffering from low approval ratings, but when the public are offered the choice of Keir Starmer or Nigel Farage as prime minister, the incumbent holds a commanding lead over the challenger by 44% to 29%.
Without a decent wedge of "I don't like X, but I want to stop Y" votes, Reform are currently on "not enough". FPTP has always been a mixture of positive and negative votes, and having five parties turns that effect up to 11.
I predict even Starmer’s head to head performance will crater over time. Indeed it will get so bad he will step down
Moreover the Tories are inevitably going to replace Badenoch. If they have the sense to install Jenrick - energetic, clever, ruthless, tiny, good at social media - he could also prosper against the lifeless pathetic Sir Keir Traitor
Jenrick would take more votes from Farage than Starmer
For gods sake tell them to choose Jenrick. He’s your only hope. The only Tory with ideas and vigour and chutzpah
If you choose cleverly or stride or whatever you are accepting terminal decline and irrelevance
Cleverly or Stride can at least pitch for centrist swing voters more than Kemi and there is little polling evidence Jenrick would win back many Farage voters
Cleverly is a liability and Stride is a nonentity.
What did @StillWaters mean by his mother’s observation that Keir Starmer had an “interesting approach to money?”
I think Keir is very boring, very timid. But can we please accept too that he’s that quite rare thing in British high office: a lower middle class striver.
The last one was John Major. And before him, basically nobody.
Likes a freebie. When he was DPP he charged the taxpayer for a chauffeur driven car to take him to work and back when it was 20 mins on the tube
As I understand it, he had to travel a lot inside the UK and the car was to facilitate that. No different I’d suggest to what I guess a Cabinet Minister has access to.
Why does he not travel under hmrc rules for travel that applies to all companies?
HMRC is not the authority on how public or private sector companies manage executive travel.
Indeed, any company can offer transportation for their employees.
Not though from home to home office...that is taxable
And we know that aspect of the expense wasn’t taxed?
Do we have any evidence it was? Lets face it mp's and high muckety mucks seem to get away without paying a lot of shit the rest of us are taxed on frankly.....this is a man with a tax free pension from being dpp for fucks sake...you really think he was paying tax on this perk?
Oh, come off it. If you are making the accusation the onus is on you.
Well seeing as its impossible to get his tax records no one can provide evidence except circumstantial such as making sure he wouldn't even pay income tax on his golden pension when most people are subject to it. We also know for a fact that all politicians don't get taxed for a lot of shit that everyday people do so yes sorry I absolutely believe till he disproves it that he wasn't taxed like one of the little people on his chauffeur driven perk. So do most people....proof indeed isn't even relevant its politics. Its what voters believe that counts not what is true and Starmer has demonstrated time and time again his venality for not paying for shit that normal people have to
Obviously since he was DPP, he has become very frugal with other peoples money and never takes a freebie.....
I bet Chez Starmer bathroom is jammed full of tiny bottles of showergel and shampoo he has brought back with him from all the hotels he has been staying in over the last 11 months.
That reminds me of a lawyer I knew who, though extremely honourable and generous in virtually every way, for some reason stockpiled those foil-wrapped pats of butter you get in restaurants. His fridge had hundreds of them.
People are funny. Perhaps lawyers above all.
I steal the mini shampoos as they are useful for when you are flying hand luggage only
Countries in southern Europe have reported a surge in middle class families fleeing Britain for the continent since Labour’s election victory last summer.
New figures show that applications from the UK for golden visas in countries such as Greece and Portugal have risen sharply over the past year. Greece has become a popular destination, with golden visa applications from the UK having surged by almost 50 per cent since last summer. Portugal also registered a sharp jump (66.2 per cent increase), in the number of Britons applying for its golden visa scheme last year.
I’m in the plaza lounge at T2 thanks to the grovelling airline
If you want to pay to come In here it’s £36 AN HOUR
Who the fuck pays that for dismal sandwiches, Lidl cheese and tiny thimbles of execrable wine?
Most airports lounges in the West are a total scam these days. They let the riff raff in and have cost engineered them to the gills.
You fly commercial?
I know....don't say it too loudly, I even have to fly coach sometimes..yuck.
I have been fortune enough to do the private plane thing a couple of times and I fully understand why the likes of top pro golfers, who have to fly to a different location every week, use them.
Warren Buffett once gave a speech to graduating students:
“If you think of the difference between me and you, we wear the same clothes basically… we eat similar food—we all go to McDonald’s or Dairy Queen… we live in a house that’s warm in winter and cool in summer… the only thing we do is we travel differently.”
That was a different age, when graduate students wouldn't be ashamed of going to McDonald’s or Dairy Queen.
Errr: the McDonalds in most college towns are pretty busy.
What did @StillWaters mean by his mother’s observation that Keir Starmer had an “interesting approach to money?”
I think Keir is very boring, very timid. But can we please accept too that he’s that quite rare thing in British high office: a lower middle class striver.
The last one was John Major. And before him, basically nobody.
Likes a freebie. When he was DPP he charged the taxpayer for a chauffeur driven car to take him to work and back when it was 20 mins on the tube
As I understand it, he had to travel a lot inside the UK and the car was to facilitate that. No different I’d suggest to what I guess a Cabinet Minister has access to.
Why does he not travel under hmrc rules for travel that applies to all companies?
HMRC is not the authority on how public or private sector companies manage executive travel.
Indeed, any company can offer transportation for their employees.
Not though from home to home office...that is taxable
And we know that aspect of the expense wasn’t taxed?
Do we have any evidence it was? Lets face it mp's and high muckety mucks seem to get away without paying a lot of shit the rest of us are taxed on frankly.....this is a man with a tax free pension from being dpp for fucks sake...you really think he was paying tax on this perk?
Oh, come off it. If you are making the accusation the onus is on you.
Well seeing as its impossible to get his tax records no one can provide evidence except circumstantial such as making sure he wouldn't even pay income tax on his golden pension when most people are subject to it. We also know for a fact that all politicians don't get taxed for a lot of shit that everyday people do so yes sorry I absolutely believe till he disproves it that he wasn't taxed like one of the little people on his chauffeur driven perk. So do most people....proof indeed isn't even relevant its politics. Its what voters believe that counts not what is true and Starmer has demonstrated time and time again his venality for not paying for shit that normal people have to
What a load of waffle trying to defend a completely unsubstantiated allegation.
What did @StillWaters mean by his mother’s observation that Keir Starmer had an “interesting approach to money?”
I think Keir is very boring, very timid. But can we please accept too that he’s that quite rare thing in British high office: a lower middle class striver.
The last one was John Major. And before him, basically nobody.
Likes a freebie. When he was DPP he charged the taxpayer for a chauffeur driven car to take him to work and back when it was 20 mins on the tube
As I understand it, he had to travel a lot inside the UK and the car was to facilitate that. No different I’d suggest to what I guess a Cabinet Minister has access to.
Why does he not travel under hmrc rules for travel that applies to all companies?
HMRC is not the authority on how public or private sector companies manage executive travel.
Indeed, any company can offer transportation for their employees.
Not though from home to home office...that is taxable
And we know that aspect of the expense wasn’t taxed?
Do we have any evidence it was? Lets face it mp's and high muckety mucks seem to get away without paying a lot of shit the rest of us are taxed on frankly.....this is a man with a tax free pension from being dpp for fucks sake...you really think he was paying tax on this perk?
How has he got a tax free pension? Other than the usual tax treatment of pensions that is
What did @StillWaters mean by his mother’s observation that Keir Starmer had an “interesting approach to money?”
I think Keir is very boring, very timid. But can we please accept too that he’s that quite rare thing in British high office: a lower middle class striver.
The last one was John Major. And before him, basically nobody.
Likes a freebie. When he was DPP he charged the taxpayer for a chauffeur driven car to take him to work and back when it was 20 mins on the tube
As I understand it, he had to travel a lot inside the UK and the car was to facilitate that. No different I’d suggest to what I guess a Cabinet Minister has access to.
Why does he not travel under hmrc rules for travel that applies to all companies?
HMRC is not the authority on how public or private sector companies manage executive travel.
Indeed, any company can offer transportation for their employees.
Not though from home to home office...that is taxable
And we know that aspect of the expense wasn’t taxed?
Do we have any evidence it was? Lets face it mp's and high muckety mucks seem to get away without paying a lot of shit the rest of us are taxed on frankly.....this is a man with a tax free pension from being dpp for fucks sake...you really think he was paying tax on this perk?
We know from Currygate and Freebiegate that Starmer knows precisely where the lines are drawn and how to stay just on the right side of them, and from Partygate how to oust Prime Ministers who step over them. So yes, I'd expect Starmer's car use to have been wholly within the letter if not the spirit of tax law.
What did @StillWaters mean by his mother’s observation that Keir Starmer had an “interesting approach to money?”
I think Keir is very boring, very timid. But can we please accept too that he’s that quite rare thing in British high office: a lower middle class striver.
The last one was John Major. And before him, basically nobody.
Likes a freebie. When he was DPP he charged the taxpayer for a chauffeur driven car to take him to work and back when it was 20 mins on the tube
As I understand it, he had to travel a lot inside the UK and the car was to facilitate that. No different I’d suggest to what I guess a Cabinet Minister has access to.
Why does he not travel under hmrc rules for travel that applies to all companies?
HMRC is not the authority on how public or private sector companies manage executive travel.
Indeed, any company can offer transportation for their employees.
Not though from home to home office...that is taxable
And we know that aspect of the expense wasn’t taxed?
Do we have any evidence it was? Lets face it mp's and high muckety mucks seem to get away without paying a lot of shit the rest of us are taxed on frankly.....this is a man with a tax free pension from being dpp for fucks sake...you really think he was paying tax on this perk?
How has he got a tax free pension? Other than the usual tax treatment of pensions that is
Why/how did it take Slalom weeks to realise/admit that he'd accidentally said something controversial in a speech to nation?
A lady who deleted a tweet an hour later is in jail for years in the same nation
Because he is lying.
It was a dog whistle for Reform, that isn't working, and those on the left have heard the dog whistle and screamed Enoch Powell / Right Far Adjacent Enabler, and so he is trying to win back the left by claiming somebody else wrote it and he wouldn't have said it if he knew.
You don't make major relaunch statements without that speech not been carefully written weeks before and multiple drafts and demands for feedback / edits from the PM.
What did @StillWaters mean by his mother’s observation that Keir Starmer had an “interesting approach to money?”
I think Keir is very boring, very timid. But can we please accept too that he’s that quite rare thing in British high office: a lower middle class striver.
The last one was John Major. And before him, basically nobody.
Edward Heath. (Another vote)
Thatcher, the grocer’s daughter. Got quite a lot of stick for her background.
What did @StillWaters mean by his mother’s observation that Keir Starmer had an “interesting approach to money?”
I think Keir is very boring, very timid. But can we please accept too that he’s that quite rare thing in British high office: a lower middle class striver.
The last one was John Major. And before him, basically nobody.
Likes a freebie. When he was DPP he charged the taxpayer for a chauffeur driven car to take him to work and back when it was 20 mins on the tube
As I understand it, he had to travel a lot inside the UK and the car was to facilitate that. No different I’d suggest to what I guess a Cabinet Minister has access to.
Why does he not travel under hmrc rules for travel that applies to all companies?
HMRC is not the authority on how public or private sector companies manage executive travel.
Indeed, any company can offer transportation for their employees.
Not though from home to home office...that is taxable
And we know that aspect of the expense wasn’t taxed?
Do we have any evidence it was? Lets face it mp's and high muckety mucks seem to get away without paying a lot of shit the rest of us are taxed on frankly.....this is a man with a tax free pension from being dpp for fucks sake...you really think he was paying tax on this perk?
We know from Currygate and Freebiegate that Starmer knows precisely where the lines are drawn and how to stay just on the right side of them, and from Partygate how to oust Prime Ministers who step over them. So yes, I'd expect Starmer's car use to have been wholly within the letter if not the spirit of tax law.
He claims he can't even read his own fucking speech
Speaking of travel scamming, for about 6 months in the year 2000, I didn’t pay my rail fare to get into Waterloo from Raynes Park. I must have had a Zone 1/2 travel card only, as it was possible I think to go straight from the train and onto the Waterloo and City.
I was extremely poor in those days, in an oversized dead man’s suit I had got from a charity shop.
I don’t agree that Palestine Action are a “terrorist” organisation.
The anti-terror laws are, perhaps rightly, very oppressive. They should be used sparingly. This is another overreach from the Home Office.
On the other hand, I should not have been scandalised had the vandals been shot by troops in their attempt to sabotage the planes.
Am the only person who holds this opinion?
I am always interested in those who think that the State will stand confused and do nothing, when they carry out some action.
They seem to believe that they can do anything but the State must play by the Rules of Conkers. Or something.
Edit : would prefer that they were given what the French police (still) refer to as “passer à tabac”
The same odd logic suggests that the State should provide arts funding to Kneecap, who are avowedly in favour of the State’s violent dissolution.
During the Troubles it was suggested that those who were convicted of terrorism should have unemployment benefit withdrawn.
Context - the structure of the paramilitaries was quite feudal. Each unit had a boss who was often the owner of a business (or businesses). The foot soldiers were unemployed, but hired (for cash) on the black to said businesses by said bosses. So removing unemployment benefit would have broken the business model.
The proposal was rejected.
Equally, a proposal to replace the propellant powder in cached terrorist firearms with RDX was nixed. The idea was to randomly do this to some bullets. When fired they would explode, destroying the gun and maiming the person firing it. Seemed like a good idea to me.
I'm guess it's already known, but can't access forums on main site via edge/win11. Just get "politicalbetting.vanillacommunity.com refused to connect."
What did @StillWaters mean by his mother’s observation that Keir Starmer had an “interesting approach to money?”
I think Keir is very boring, very timid. But can we please accept too that he’s that quite rare thing in British high office: a lower middle class striver.
The last one was John Major. And before him, basically nobody.
Likes a freebie. When he was DPP he charged the taxpayer for a chauffeur driven car to take him to work and back when it was 20 mins on the tube
As I understand it, he had to travel a lot inside the UK and the car was to facilitate that. No different I’d suggest to what I guess a Cabinet Minister has access to.
Why does he not travel under hmrc rules for travel that applies to all companies?
HMRC is not the authority on how public or private sector companies manage executive travel.
Indeed, any company can offer transportation for their employees.
Not though from home to home office...that is taxable
And we know that aspect of the expense wasn’t taxed?
Do we have any evidence it was? Lets face it mp's and high muckety mucks seem to get away without paying a lot of shit the rest of us are taxed on frankly.....this is a man with a tax free pension from being dpp for fucks sake...you really think he was paying tax on this perk?
Oh, come off it. If you are making the accusation the onus is on you.
Well seeing as its impossible to get his tax records no one can provide evidence except circumstantial such as making sure he wouldn't even pay income tax on his golden pension when most people are subject to it. We also know for a fact that all politicians don't get taxed for a lot of shit that everyday people do so yes sorry I absolutely believe till he disproves it that he wasn't taxed like one of the little people on his chauffeur driven perk. So do most people....proof indeed isn't even relevant its politics. Its what voters believe that counts not what is true and Starmer has demonstrated time and time again his venality for not paying for shit that normal people have to
What a load of waffle trying to defend a completely unsubstantiated allegation.
Do you disagree Starmer has a pension for being dpp that is not subject to income tax? Do you disagree Starmer has not taken freebies such as suits, glasses, concert and football tickets?
Why is this in your mind for circumstantial evidence for suggesting he never paid benefit in kind tax for a chauffeur driven car from home to office?
I can't prove he didn't without hacking hmrc....you can't prove he did....however given he avoids paying for anything he doesn't absolutely have to I think the balance of probabilities is on my side. If he doesn't like my opinion he can sue me and prove me wrong by providing his tax returns in a court of law
What did @StillWaters mean by his mother’s observation that Keir Starmer had an “interesting approach to money?”
I think Keir is very boring, very timid. But can we please accept too that he’s that quite rare thing in British high office: a lower middle class striver.
The last one was John Major. And before him, basically nobody.
Likes a freebie. When he was DPP he charged the taxpayer for a chauffeur driven car to take him to work and back when it was 20 mins on the tube
As I understand it, he had to travel a lot inside the UK and the car was to facilitate that. No different I’d suggest to what I guess a Cabinet Minister has access to.
Why does he not travel under hmrc rules for travel that applies to all companies?
HMRC is not the authority on how public or private sector companies manage executive travel.
Indeed, any company can offer transportation for their employees.
Not though from home to home office...that is taxable
And we know that aspect of the expense wasn’t taxed?
Do we have any evidence it was? Lets face it mp's and high muckety mucks seem to get away without paying a lot of shit the rest of us are taxed on frankly.....this is a man with a tax free pension from being dpp for fucks sake...you really think he was paying tax on this perk?
How has he got a tax free pension? Other than the usual tax treatment of pensions that is
That tells me some 1971 Act applies to Keir Starmer. I am sure you will tell me what the 1971 act does, and how many people it applies to (in fact, how many people have their own regulations doing so)
What did @StillWaters mean by his mother’s observation that Keir Starmer had an “interesting approach to money?”
I think Keir is very boring, very timid. But can we please accept too that he’s that quite rare thing in British high office: a lower middle class striver.
The last one was John Major. And before him, basically nobody.
Likes a freebie. When he was DPP he charged the taxpayer for a chauffeur driven car to take him to work and back when it was 20 mins on the tube
As I understand it, he had to travel a lot inside the UK and the car was to facilitate that. No different I’d suggest to what I guess a Cabinet Minister has access to.
Why does he not travel under hmrc rules for travel that applies to all companies?
HMRC is not the authority on how public or private sector companies manage executive travel.
Indeed, any company can offer transportation for their employees.
Not though from home to home office...that is taxable
And we know that aspect of the expense wasn’t taxed?
Do we have any evidence it was? Lets face it mp's and high muckety mucks seem to get away without paying a lot of shit the rest of us are taxed on frankly.....this is a man with a tax free pension from being dpp for fucks sake...you really think he was paying tax on this perk?
Oh, come off it. If you are making the accusation the onus is on you.
Well seeing as its impossible to get his tax records no one can provide evidence except circumstantial such as making sure he wouldn't even pay income tax on his golden pension when most people are subject to it. We also know for a fact that all politicians don't get taxed for a lot of shit that everyday people do so yes sorry I absolutely believe till he disproves it that he wasn't taxed like one of the little people on his chauffeur driven perk. So do most people....proof indeed isn't even relevant its politics. Its what voters believe that counts not what is true and Starmer has demonstrated time and time again his venality for not paying for shit that normal people have to
What a load of waffle trying to defend a completely unsubstantiated allegation.
Do you disagree Starmer has a pension for being dpp that is not subject to income tax? Do you disagree Starmer has not taken freebies such as suits, glasses, concert and football tickets?
Why is this in your mind for circumstantial evidence for suggesting he never paid benefit in kind tax for a chauffeur driven car from home to office?
I can't prove he didn't without hacking hmrc....you can't prove he did....however given he avoids paying for anything he doesn't absolutely have to I think the balance of probabilities is on my side. If he doesn't like my opinion he can sue me and prove me wrong by providing his tax returns in a court of law
More waffle. If you are going to claim someone has been doing something illegally, you should have the evidence to back it up.
What did @StillWaters mean by his mother’s observation that Keir Starmer had an “interesting approach to money?”
I think Keir is very boring, very timid. But can we please accept too that he’s that quite rare thing in British high office: a lower middle class striver.
The last one was John Major. And before him, basically nobody.
Likes a freebie. When he was DPP he charged the taxpayer for a chauffeur driven car to take him to work and back when it was 20 mins on the tube
As I understand it, he had to travel a lot inside the UK and the car was to facilitate that. No different I’d suggest to what I guess a Cabinet Minister has access to.
Why does he not travel under hmrc rules for travel that applies to all companies?
HMRC is not the authority on how public or private sector companies manage executive travel.
Indeed, any company can offer transportation for their employees.
Not though from home to home office...that is taxable
And we know that aspect of the expense wasn’t taxed?
Do we have any evidence it was? Lets face it mp's and high muckety mucks seem to get away without paying a lot of shit the rest of us are taxed on frankly.....this is a man with a tax free pension from being dpp for fucks sake...you really think he was paying tax on this perk?
How has he got a tax free pension? Other than the usual tax treatment of pensions that is
That tells me some 1971 Act applies to Keir Starmer. I am sure you will tell me what the 1971 act does, and how many people it applies to (in fact, how many people have their own regulations doing so)
I think it removes the lifetime allowance cap, so it would be tax free above £1mn where tax would normally have been paid.
What did @StillWaters mean by his mother’s observation that Keir Starmer had an “interesting approach to money?”
I think Keir is very boring, very timid. But can we please accept too that he’s that quite rare thing in British high office: a lower middle class striver.
The last one was John Major. And before him, basically nobody.
Likes a freebie. When he was DPP he charged the taxpayer for a chauffeur driven car to take him to work and back when it was 20 mins on the tube
As I understand it, he had to travel a lot inside the UK and the car was to facilitate that. No different I’d suggest to what I guess a Cabinet Minister has access to.
Why does he not travel under hmrc rules for travel that applies to all companies?
HMRC is not the authority on how public or private sector companies manage executive travel.
Indeed, any company can offer transportation for their employees.
Not though from home to home office...that is taxable
And we know that aspect of the expense wasn’t taxed?
Do we have any evidence it was? Lets face it mp's and high muckety mucks seem to get away without paying a lot of shit the rest of us are taxed on frankly.....this is a man with a tax free pension from being dpp for fucks sake...you really think he was paying tax on this perk?
We know from Currygate and Freebiegate that Starmer knows precisely where the lines are drawn and how to stay just on the right side of them, and from Partygate how to oust Prime Ministers who step over them. So yes, I'd expect Starmer's car use to have been wholly within the letter if not the spirit of tax law.
He claims he can't even read his own fucking speech
As has been pointed out, the speech was made hours after somebody tried to burn his family members alive, which was second such fire related to Starmer.
Find it sad that Kneecap are getting big crowds and BBC pumping them, on the back of their behaviour. Its such an obvious and cynical play...but that it not why I find it sad, it is their music is utter shit.
RATM had this playbook 20+ years ago, with support of the likes of the Zapatista, but the difference is they made ionic music and Tom Morello is a guitar genius.
What did @StillWaters mean by his mother’s observation that Keir Starmer had an “interesting approach to money?”
I think Keir is very boring, very timid. But can we please accept too that he’s that quite rare thing in British high office: a lower middle class striver.
The last one was John Major. And before him, basically nobody.
Likes a freebie. When he was DPP he charged the taxpayer for a chauffeur driven car to take him to work and back when it was 20 mins on the tube
As I understand it, he had to travel a lot inside the UK and the car was to facilitate that. No different I’d suggest to what I guess a Cabinet Minister has access to.
Why does he not travel under hmrc rules for travel that applies to all companies?
HMRC is not the authority on how public or private sector companies manage executive travel.
Indeed, any company can offer transportation for their employees.
Not though from home to home office...that is taxable
And we know that aspect of the expense wasn’t taxed?
Do we have any evidence it was? Lets face it mp's and high muckety mucks seem to get away without paying a lot of shit the rest of us are taxed on frankly.....this is a man with a tax free pension from being dpp for fucks sake...you really think he was paying tax on this perk?
Oh, come off it. If you are making the accusation the onus is on you.
Well seeing as its impossible to get his tax records no one can provide evidence except circumstantial such as making sure he wouldn't even pay income tax on his golden pension when most people are subject to it. We also know for a fact that all politicians don't get taxed for a lot of shit that everyday people do so yes sorry I absolutely believe till he disproves it that he wasn't taxed like one of the little people on his chauffeur driven perk. So do most people....proof indeed isn't even relevant its politics. Its what voters believe that counts not what is true and Starmer has demonstrated time and time again his venality for not paying for shit that normal people have to
What a load of waffle trying to defend a completely unsubstantiated allegation.
Do you disagree Starmer has a pension for being dpp that is not subject to income tax? Do you disagree Starmer has not taken freebies such as suits, glasses, concert and football tickets?
Why is this in your mind for circumstantial evidence for suggesting he never paid benefit in kind tax for a chauffeur driven car from home to office?
I can't prove he didn't without hacking hmrc....you can't prove he did....however given he avoids paying for anything he doesn't absolutely have to I think the balance of probabilities is on my side. If he doesn't like my opinion he can sue me and prove me wrong by providing his tax returns in a court of law
More waffle. If you are going to claim someone has been doing something illegally, you should have the evidence to back it up.
Let him sue....all mp's are tax avoiders, within the spirit of the law because they exempted themselves from the tax laws they pass for everyone else. I didn't say he did it illegally I said he didn't pay tax that normal people would have been expected to pay because pretty sure there will be some exemption somewhere in the tax code for people like him
If you're getting a Vanilla error or unable to access the comments through the main website we believe this is related to the Vanilla upgrades that are scheduled to last until the 4th of July.
What did @StillWaters mean by his mother’s observation that Keir Starmer had an “interesting approach to money?”
I think Keir is very boring, very timid. But can we please accept too that he’s that quite rare thing in British high office: a lower middle class striver.
The last one was John Major. And before him, basically nobody.
Likes a freebie. When he was DPP he charged the taxpayer for a chauffeur driven car to take him to work and back when it was 20 mins on the tube
As I understand it, he had to travel a lot inside the UK and the car was to facilitate that. No different I’d suggest to what I guess a Cabinet Minister has access to.
Why does he not travel under hmrc rules for travel that applies to all companies?
HMRC is not the authority on how public or private sector companies manage executive travel.
Indeed, any company can offer transportation for their employees.
Not though from home to home office...that is taxable
And we know that aspect of the expense wasn’t taxed?
Do we have any evidence it was? Lets face it mp's and high muckety mucks seem to get away without paying a lot of shit the rest of us are taxed on frankly.....this is a man with a tax free pension from being dpp for fucks sake...you really think he was paying tax on this perk?
Oh, come off it. If you are making the accusation the onus is on you.
Well seeing as its impossible to get his tax records no one can provide evidence except circumstantial such as making sure he wouldn't even pay income tax on his golden pension when most people are subject to it. We also know for a fact that all politicians don't get taxed for a lot of shit that everyday people do so yes sorry I absolutely believe till he disproves it that he wasn't taxed like one of the little people on his chauffeur driven perk. So do most people....proof indeed isn't even relevant its politics. Its what voters believe that counts not what is true and Starmer has demonstrated time and time again his venality for not paying for shit that normal people have to
What a load of waffle trying to defend a completely unsubstantiated allegation.
Do you disagree Starmer has a pension for being dpp that is not subject to income tax? Do you disagree Starmer has not taken freebies such as suits, glasses, concert and football tickets?
Why is this in your mind for circumstantial evidence for suggesting he never paid benefit in kind tax for a chauffeur driven car from home to office?
I can't prove he didn't without hacking hmrc....you can't prove he did....however given he avoids paying for anything he doesn't absolutely have to I think the balance of probabilities is on my side. If he doesn't like my opinion he can sue me and prove me wrong by providing his tax returns in a court of law
More waffle. If you are going to claim someone has been doing something illegally, you should have the evidence to back it up.
Let him sue....all mp's are tax avoiders, within the spirit of the law because they exempted themselves from the tax laws they pass for everyone else. I didn't say he did it illegally I said he didn't pay tax that normal people would have been expected to pay because pretty sure there will be some exemption somewhere in the tax code for people like him
Shut up, before you get the site into trouble.
Also can you provide evidence that you don't bugger goats every Friday and the first Saturday of the month.
I don’t get the ire at Starmer for failing to think hard enough about his speech.
The issue is rather that he’s done another u-turn, cementing his reputation as a man without any fixed vision or ideology.
Apparently Downing Street are enraged by the Observer’s portrayal which is supposed to be both faithful and sympathetic.
Another thing it shows is that you can't separate style from substance.
A politician more concerned with his image would have asked himself, "How will this look?" Instead Starmer just saw it as a routine speech until he unexpectedly got a backlash for it.
Home Office staff are concerned about the “absurd” decision to ban Palestine Action under UK anti-terrorism laws, a senior civil servant has said.
“My colleagues and I were shocked by the announcement,” they said. “All week, the office has been a very tense atmosphere, charged with concern about treating a non-violent protest group the same as actual terrorist organisations like Isis, and the dangerous precedent this sets.
“From desk to desk, colleagues are exchanging concerned and bemused conversations about how absurd this is and how impossible it will be to enforce. Are they really going to prosecute as terrorists everyone who expresses support for Palestine Action’s work to disrupt the flow of arms to Israel as it commits war crimes?
“It’s ridiculous and it’s being widely condemned in anxious conversations internally as a blatant misuse of anti-terror laws for political purposes to clamp down on protests which are affecting the profits of arms companies.”
I would have totally sympathised with this view UNTIL the stories came out about a) their sabotaging of arms for Ukraine and b) their pro-Putin backer.
It seems like only last week we were told of PA's Iranian money.
At the time, what I could see of social media was very angry at the PA plane stunt and split between calling it terrorism or even treason.
Now I am no hotshot lawyer like Keir Starmer or even Rob Jenrick but istm it is hard to call painting or even destroying planes terrorism but easy to call it treason.
Why is it hard to call it terrorism? Would it be terrorism if a bomb had been used to cause the criminal damage?
Who is terrorised? And that is why it would be different if PA were running around setting off bombs. Even if what they did is legally defined as terrorism, is it in the common use of the term?
Call it sabotage. Because that is what it is. Traditionally*, that gets you a short drop and a sudden stop.
The Tankies should be all for stringing up Saboteurs - they were always justifying Stalin doing that to anyone he called a Saboteur or a Wrecker....
*As codified in the early Hague conventions. You have to give them a nice trial, with no drum head court martials and a last cigarette.
What did @StillWaters mean by his mother’s observation that Keir Starmer had an “interesting approach to money?”
I think Keir is very boring, very timid. But can we please accept too that he’s that quite rare thing in British high office: a lower middle class striver.
The last one was John Major. And before him, basically nobody.
Likes a freebie. When he was DPP he charged the taxpayer for a chauffeur driven car to take him to work and back when it was 20 mins on the tube
As I understand it, he had to travel a lot inside the UK and the car was to facilitate that. No different I’d suggest to what I guess a Cabinet Minister has access to.
Why does he not travel under hmrc rules for travel that applies to all companies?
HMRC is not the authority on how public or private sector companies manage executive travel.
Indeed, any company can offer transportation for their employees.
Not though from home to home office...that is taxable
And we know that aspect of the expense wasn’t taxed?
Do we have any evidence it was? Lets face it mp's and high muckety mucks seem to get away without paying a lot of shit the rest of us are taxed on frankly.....this is a man with a tax free pension from being dpp for fucks sake...you really think he was paying tax on this perk?
Oh, come off it. If you are making the accusation the onus is on you.
Well seeing as its impossible to get his tax records no one can provide evidence except circumstantial such as making sure he wouldn't even pay income tax on his golden pension when most people are subject to it. We also know for a fact that all politicians don't get taxed for a lot of shit that everyday people do so yes sorry I absolutely believe till he disproves it that he wasn't taxed like one of the little people on his chauffeur driven perk. So do most people....proof indeed isn't even relevant its politics. Its what voters believe that counts not what is true and Starmer has demonstrated time and time again his venality for not paying for shit that normal people have to
This gem:
"making sure he wouldn't even pay income tax on his golden pension when most people are subject to it"
marks you out as someone who doesn't understand what they're talking about. His DPP pension is exempt from the lifetime allowance, not from income tax generally. It's the same deal as judges get. (In fact AIUI technically speaking his DPP pension is ALL taxable, there is no tax free lump sum allowance, but any lump sum is grossed up to compensate for the tax on it.)
The value of that deal is lessened anyway by the scrapping of the lifetime allowance in the dog days of the last Tory government.
What did @StillWaters mean by his mother’s observation that Keir Starmer had an “interesting approach to money?”
I think Keir is very boring, very timid. But can we please accept too that he’s that quite rare thing in British high office: a lower middle class striver.
The last one was John Major. And before him, basically nobody.
Likes a freebie. When he was DPP he charged the taxpayer for a chauffeur driven car to take him to work and back when it was 20 mins on the tube
As I understand it, he had to travel a lot inside the UK and the car was to facilitate that. No different I’d suggest to what I guess a Cabinet Minister has access to.
Why does he not travel under hmrc rules for travel that applies to all companies?
HMRC is not the authority on how public or private sector companies manage executive travel.
Indeed, any company can offer transportation for their employees.
Not though from home to home office...that is taxable
And we know that aspect of the expense wasn’t taxed?
Do we have any evidence it was? Lets face it mp's and high muckety mucks seem to get away without paying a lot of shit the rest of us are taxed on frankly.....this is a man with a tax free pension from being dpp for fucks sake...you really think he was paying tax on this perk?
We know from Currygate and Freebiegate that Starmer knows precisely where the lines are drawn and how to stay just on the right side of them, and from Partygate how to oust Prime Ministers who step over them. So yes, I'd expect Starmer's car use to have been wholly within the letter if not the spirit of tax law.
He claims he can't even read his own fucking speech
As has been pointed out, the speech was made hours after somebody tried to burn his family members alive, which was second such fire related to Starmer.
His attention may have been elsewhere.
Sorry TSE, that would certainly excuse a poor performance of the speech. But I call absolute BS on his claims he never read, never thought about it. This was a major speech as part of a long organised major relaunch, those things aren't done on the day. This was all about taking the fight to Reform, it will have been planned out for ages.
He is also still doing deflection, well it was others who wrote it, they didn't understand. A leader would say, I got it wrong. There was a lot going on, reference the terrible attack, but I got it wrong, I apologise for those offended by it, end of statement.
What did @StillWaters mean by his mother’s observation that Keir Starmer had an “interesting approach to money?”
I think Keir is very boring, very timid. But can we please accept too that he’s that quite rare thing in British high office: a lower middle class striver.
The last one was John Major. And before him, basically nobody.
Likes a freebie. When he was DPP he charged the taxpayer for a chauffeur driven car to take him to work and back when it was 20 mins on the tube
As I understand it, he had to travel a lot inside the UK and the car was to facilitate that. No different I’d suggest to what I guess a Cabinet Minister has access to.
“Keir Starmer billed taxpayers for nearly a quarter of a million pounds in travel costs while he was director of public prosecutions, it has been revealed.
The future Labour leader put nearly three times as much on expenses as his CPS successor Alison Saunders, including first class flights abroad and a chauffeur driven car.
Sir Keir charged taxpayers £161,273 for the vehicle and driver despite living just four miles and a direct Tube ride from the Crown Prosecution Service offices.
The car cost taxpayers an average of £1,920 a week for nearly two years until he stopped using it following embarrassing media reports.
Sir Keir served as Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) for five years from 2008-13.
His successor Alison Saunders, who was also DPP for five years, spent £67,340, less than a third of Sir Keir’s total.“
Perhaps Saunders adopted a more ascetic approach, following said news reports.
I don’t really see a smoking gun here. British public life tends to the punitively spartan if you ask me.
I agree but the same Starmer and his party in opposition were gleefully condemning Rishi Sunak for travelling to visits by helicopter or limo and not catching the 09.45 from Euston.
What did @StillWaters mean by his mother’s observation that Keir Starmer had an “interesting approach to money?”
I think Keir is very boring, very timid. But can we please accept too that he’s that quite rare thing in British high office: a lower middle class striver.
The last one was John Major. And before him, basically nobody.
Likes a freebie. When he was DPP he charged the taxpayer for a chauffeur driven car to take him to work and back when it was 20 mins on the tube
As I understand it, he had to travel a lot inside the UK and the car was to facilitate that. No different I’d suggest to what I guess a Cabinet Minister has access to.
Why does he not travel under hmrc rules for travel that applies to all companies?
HMRC is not the authority on how public or private sector companies manage executive travel.
Indeed, any company can offer transportation for their employees.
Not though from home to home office...that is taxable
And we know that aspect of the expense wasn’t taxed?
Do we have any evidence it was? Lets face it mp's and high muckety mucks seem to get away without paying a lot of shit the rest of us are taxed on frankly.....this is a man with a tax free pension from being dpp for fucks sake...you really think he was paying tax on this perk?
Oh, come off it. If you are making the accusation the onus is on you.
Well seeing as its impossible to get his tax records no one can provide evidence except circumstantial such as making sure he wouldn't even pay income tax on his golden pension when most people are subject to it. We also know for a fact that all politicians don't get taxed for a lot of shit that everyday people do so yes sorry I absolutely believe till he disproves it that he wasn't taxed like one of the little people on his chauffeur driven perk. So do most people....proof indeed isn't even relevant its politics. Its what voters believe that counts not what is true and Starmer has demonstrated time and time again his venality for not paying for shit that normal people have to
What a load of waffle trying to defend a completely unsubstantiated allegation.
Do you disagree Starmer has a pension for being dpp that is not subject to income tax? Do you disagree Starmer has not taken freebies such as suits, glasses, concert and football tickets?
Why is this in your mind for circumstantial evidence for suggesting he never paid benefit in kind tax for a chauffeur driven car from home to office?
I can't prove he didn't without hacking hmrc....you can't prove he did....however given he avoids paying for anything he doesn't absolutely have to I think the balance of probabilities is on my side. If he doesn't like my opinion he can sue me and prove me wrong by providing his tax returns in a court of law
More waffle. If you are going to claim someone has been doing something illegally, you should have the evidence to back it up.
Let him sue....all mp's are tax avoiders, within the spirit of the law because they exempted themselves from the tax laws they pass for everyone else. I didn't say he did it illegally I said he didn't pay tax that normal people would have been expected to pay because pretty sure there will be some exemption somewhere in the tax code for people like him
Shut up, before you get the site into trouble.
Also can you provide evidence that you don't bugger goats every Friday and the first Saturday of the month.
Well does evidence of me only buggering goats on mondays and tuesdays count?
What did @StillWaters mean by his mother’s observation that Keir Starmer had an “interesting approach to money?”
I think Keir is very boring, very timid. But can we please accept too that he’s that quite rare thing in British high office: a lower middle class striver.
The last one was John Major. And before him, basically nobody.
Likes a freebie. When he was DPP he charged the taxpayer for a chauffeur driven car to take him to work and back when it was 20 mins on the tube
As I understand it, he had to travel a lot inside the UK and the car was to facilitate that. No different I’d suggest to what I guess a Cabinet Minister has access to.
Why does he not travel under hmrc rules for travel that applies to all companies?
HMRC is not the authority on how public or private sector companies manage executive travel.
Indeed, any company can offer transportation for their employees.
Not though from home to home office...that is taxable
And we know that aspect of the expense wasn’t taxed?
Do we have any evidence it was? Lets face it mp's and high muckety mucks seem to get away without paying a lot of shit the rest of us are taxed on frankly.....this is a man with a tax free pension from being dpp for fucks sake...you really think he was paying tax on this perk?
How has he got a tax free pension? Other than the usual tax treatment of pensions that is
That tells me some 1971 Act applies to Keir Starmer. I am sure you will tell me what the 1971 act does, and how many people it applies to (in fact, how many people have their own regulations doing so)
I think it removes the lifetime allowance cap, so it would be tax free above £1mn where tax would normally have been paid.
And is it unusual for such an arrangement to be made, or is it routinely made for people in certain circumstances? Indeed, why was the arrangement made for SKS?
I presume by tax free that contributions are tax free above the lifetime allowance limit, but he will pay income tax when he draws it in the normal way.
What did @StillWaters mean by his mother’s observation that Keir Starmer had an “interesting approach to money?”
I think Keir is very boring, very timid. But can we please accept too that he’s that quite rare thing in British high office: a lower middle class striver.
The last one was John Major. And before him, basically nobody.
Likes a freebie. When he was DPP he charged the taxpayer for a chauffeur driven car to take him to work and back when it was 20 mins on the tube
As I understand it, he had to travel a lot inside the UK and the car was to facilitate that. No different I’d suggest to what I guess a Cabinet Minister has access to.
Why does he not travel under hmrc rules for travel that applies to all companies?
HMRC is not the authority on how public or private sector companies manage executive travel.
Indeed, any company can offer transportation for their employees.
Not though from home to home office...that is taxable
And we know that aspect of the expense wasn’t taxed?
Do we have any evidence it was? Lets face it mp's and high muckety mucks seem to get away without paying a lot of shit the rest of us are taxed on frankly.....this is a man with a tax free pension from being dpp for fucks sake...you really think he was paying tax on this perk?
How has he got a tax free pension? Other than the usual tax treatment of pensions that is
I’m guessing it’s not due to his pension being less than the tax free allowance ?
What did @StillWaters mean by his mother’s observation that Keir Starmer had an “interesting approach to money?”
I think Keir is very boring, very timid. But can we please accept too that he’s that quite rare thing in British high office: a lower middle class striver.
The last one was John Major. And before him, basically nobody.
Likes a freebie. When he was DPP he charged the taxpayer for a chauffeur driven car to take him to work and back when it was 20 mins on the tube
As I understand it, he had to travel a lot inside the UK and the car was to facilitate that. No different I’d suggest to what I guess a Cabinet Minister has access to.
Why does he not travel under hmrc rules for travel that applies to all companies?
HMRC is not the authority on how public or private sector companies manage executive travel.
Indeed, any company can offer transportation for their employees.
Not though from home to home office...that is taxable
And we know that aspect of the expense wasn’t taxed?
Do we have any evidence it was? Lets face it mp's and high muckety mucks seem to get away without paying a lot of shit the rest of us are taxed on frankly.....this is a man with a tax free pension from being dpp for fucks sake...you really think he was paying tax on this perk?
We know from Currygate and Freebiegate that Starmer knows precisely where the lines are drawn and how to stay just on the right side of them, and from Partygate how to oust Prime Ministers who step over them. So yes, I'd expect Starmer's car use to have been wholly within the letter if not the spirit of tax law.
He claims he can't even read his own fucking speech
As has been pointed out, the speech was made hours after somebody tried to burn his family members alive, which was second such fire related to Starmer.
His attention may have been elsewhere.
Sorry TSE, that would certainly excuse a poor performance of the speech. But I call absolute BS on his claims he never read, never thought about it. This was a major speech as part of a long organised major relaunch, those things aren't done on the day.
He is also still deflection, well it was others who wrote it, they didn't understand.
A leader would say, I got it wrong. There was a lot going on, reference the terrible attack, but I got it wrong, I apologiseend of statement.
When Margret Thatcher attended a meeting, just after the Brighton Bombing, she still had dust from the bombing on her.
She shot down a number of stupid proposals, and instead picked a dual approach that led to the PIRA, eventually, calling a ceasefire.
What did @StillWaters mean by his mother’s observation that Keir Starmer had an “interesting approach to money?”
I think Keir is very boring, very timid. But can we please accept too that he’s that quite rare thing in British high office: a lower middle class striver.
The last one was John Major. And before him, basically nobody.
Likes a freebie. When he was DPP he charged the taxpayer for a chauffeur driven car to take him to work and back when it was 20 mins on the tube
As I understand it, he had to travel a lot inside the UK and the car was to facilitate that. No different I’d suggest to what I guess a Cabinet Minister has access to.
Why does he not travel under hmrc rules for travel that applies to all companies?
HMRC is not the authority on how public or private sector companies manage executive travel.
Indeed, any company can offer transportation for their employees.
Not though from home to home office...that is taxable
And we know that aspect of the expense wasn’t taxed?
Do we have any evidence it was? Lets face it mp's and high muckety mucks seem to get away without paying a lot of shit the rest of us are taxed on frankly.....this is a man with a tax free pension from being dpp for fucks sake...you really think he was paying tax on this perk?
Oh, come off it. If you are making the accusation the onus is on you.
Well seeing as its impossible to get his tax records no one can provide evidence except circumstantial such as making sure he wouldn't even pay income tax on his golden pension when most people are subject to it. We also know for a fact that all politicians don't get taxed for a lot of shit that everyday people do so yes sorry I absolutely believe till he disproves it that he wasn't taxed like one of the little people on his chauffeur driven perk. So do most people....proof indeed isn't even relevant its politics. Its what voters believe that counts not what is true and Starmer has demonstrated time and time again his venality for not paying for shit that normal people have to
What a load of waffle trying to defend a completely unsubstantiated allegation.
Do you disagree Starmer has a pension for being dpp that is not subject to income tax? Do you disagree Starmer has not taken freebies such as suits, glasses, concert and football tickets?
Why is this in your mind for circumstantial evidence for suggesting he never paid benefit in kind tax for a chauffeur driven car from home to office?
I can't prove he didn't without hacking hmrc....you can't prove he did....however given he avoids paying for anything he doesn't absolutely have to I think the balance of probabilities is on my side. If he doesn't like my opinion he can sue me and prove me wrong by providing his tax returns in a court of law
More waffle. If you are going to claim someone has been doing something illegally, you should have the evidence to back it up.
Let him sue....all mp's are tax avoiders, within the spirit of the law because they exempted themselves from the tax laws they pass for everyone else. I didn't say he did it illegally I said he didn't pay tax that normal people would have been expected to pay because pretty sure there will be some exemption somewhere in the tax code for people like him
Shut up, before you get the site into trouble.
Also can you provide evidence that you don't bugger goats every Friday and the first Saturday of the month.
What did @StillWaters mean by his mother’s observation that Keir Starmer had an “interesting approach to money?”
I think Keir is very boring, very timid. But can we please accept too that he’s that quite rare thing in British high office: a lower middle class striver.
The last one was John Major. And before him, basically nobody.
Likes a freebie. When he was DPP he charged the taxpayer for a chauffeur driven car to take him to work and back when it was 20 mins on the tube
As I understand it, he had to travel a lot inside the UK and the car was to facilitate that. No different I’d suggest to what I guess a Cabinet Minister has access to.
Why does he not travel under hmrc rules for travel that applies to all companies?
HMRC is not the authority on how public or private sector companies manage executive travel.
Indeed, any company can offer transportation for their employees.
Not though from home to home office...that is taxable
And we know that aspect of the expense wasn’t taxed?
Do we have any evidence it was? Lets face it mp's and high muckety mucks seem to get away without paying a lot of shit the rest of us are taxed on frankly.....this is a man with a tax free pension from being dpp for fucks sake...you really think he was paying tax on this perk?
Oh, come off it. If you are making the accusation the onus is on you.
Well seeing as its impossible to get his tax records no one can provide evidence except circumstantial such as making sure he wouldn't even pay income tax on his golden pension when most people are subject to it. We also know for a fact that all politicians don't get taxed for a lot of shit that everyday people do so yes sorry I absolutely believe till he disproves it that he wasn't taxed like one of the little people on his chauffeur driven perk. So do most people....proof indeed isn't even relevant its politics. Its what voters believe that counts not what is true and Starmer has demonstrated time and time again his venality for not paying for shit that normal people have to
What a load of waffle trying to defend a completely unsubstantiated allegation.
Do you disagree Starmer has a pension for being dpp that is not subject to income tax? Do you disagree Starmer has not taken freebies such as suits, glasses, concert and football tickets?
Why is this in your mind for circumstantial evidence for suggesting he never paid benefit in kind tax for a chauffeur driven car from home to office?
I can't prove he didn't without hacking hmrc....you can't prove he did....however given he avoids paying for anything he doesn't absolutely have to I think the balance of probabilities is on my side. If he doesn't like my opinion he can sue me and prove me wrong by providing his tax returns in a court of law
More waffle. If you are going to claim someone has been doing something illegally, you should have the evidence to back it up.
Let him sue....all mp's are tax avoiders, within the spirit of the law because they exempted themselves from the tax laws they pass for everyone else. I didn't say he did it illegally I said he didn't pay tax that normal people would have been expected to pay because pretty sure there will be some exemption somewhere in the tax code for people like him
Shut up, before you get the site into trouble.
Also can you provide evidence that you don't bugger goats every Friday and the first Saturday of the month.
Well does evidence of me only buggering goats on mondays and tuesdays count?
It's more, you once petted a goat and hand-fed it some grass, so you obviously regularly bugger them
What did @StillWaters mean by his mother’s observation that Keir Starmer had an “interesting approach to money?”
I think Keir is very boring, very timid. But can we please accept too that he’s that quite rare thing in British high office: a lower middle class striver.
The last one was John Major. And before him, basically nobody.
Likes a freebie. When he was DPP he charged the taxpayer for a chauffeur driven car to take him to work and back when it was 20 mins on the tube
As I understand it, he had to travel a lot inside the UK and the car was to facilitate that. No different I’d suggest to what I guess a Cabinet Minister has access to.
Why does he not travel under hmrc rules for travel that applies to all companies?
HMRC is not the authority on how public or private sector companies manage executive travel.
Indeed, any company can offer transportation for their employees.
Not though from home to home office...that is taxable
And we know that aspect of the expense wasn’t taxed?
Do we have any evidence it was? Lets face it mp's and high muckety mucks seem to get away without paying a lot of shit the rest of us are taxed on frankly.....this is a man with a tax free pension from being dpp for fucks sake...you really think he was paying tax on this perk?
We know from Currygate and Freebiegate that Starmer knows precisely where the lines are drawn and how to stay just on the right side of them, and from Partygate how to oust Prime Ministers who step over them. So yes, I'd expect Starmer's car use to have been wholly within the letter if not the spirit of tax law.
He claims he can't even read his own fucking speech
As has been pointed out, the speech was made hours after somebody tried to burn his family members alive, which was second such fire related to Starmer.
His attention may have been elsewhere.
Sorry TSE, that would certainly excuse a poor performance of the speech. But I call absolute BS on his claims he never read, never thought about it. This was a major speech as part of a long organised major relaunch, those things aren't done on the day.
He is also still deflection, well it was others who wrote it, they didn't understand.
A leader would say, I got it wrong. There was a lot going on, reference the terrible attack, but I got it wrong, I apologiseend of statement.
If Dave posted on PB he would tell you big speeches are revised up until they are delivered.
From what I have read the Island of Strangers speech didn't go through the usual prep the arson events, his security detail were on a high level.
Remember at the time it was felt to be state linked terror and it may well turn out to be the case.
When Dave screwed up over the Aston Villa/West Ham thing the first version was talking about watching the West Indies growing up until the penultimate version.
What did @StillWaters mean by his mother’s observation that Keir Starmer had an “interesting approach to money?”
I think Keir is very boring, very timid. But can we please accept too that he’s that quite rare thing in British high office: a lower middle class striver.
The last one was John Major. And before him, basically nobody.
Likes a freebie. When he was DPP he charged the taxpayer for a chauffeur driven car to take him to work and back when it was 20 mins on the tube
As I understand it, he had to travel a lot inside the UK and the car was to facilitate that. No different I’d suggest to what I guess a Cabinet Minister has access to.
Why does he not travel under hmrc rules for travel that applies to all companies?
HMRC is not the authority on how public or private sector companies manage executive travel.
Indeed, any company can offer transportation for their employees.
Not though from home to home office...that is taxable
And we know that aspect of the expense wasn’t taxed?
Do we have any evidence it was? Lets face it mp's and high muckety mucks seem to get away without paying a lot of shit the rest of us are taxed on frankly.....this is a man with a tax free pension from being dpp for fucks sake...you really think he was paying tax on this perk?
We know from Currygate and Freebiegate that Starmer knows precisely where the lines are drawn and how to stay just on the right side of them, and from Partygate how to oust Prime Ministers who step over them. So yes, I'd expect Starmer's car use to have been wholly within the letter if not the spirit of tax law.
He claims he can't even read his own fucking speech
As has been pointed out, the speech was made hours after somebody tried to burn his family members alive, which was second such fire related to Starmer.
His attention may have been elsewhere.
Mrs T managed to give a speech in Brighton the day she escaped death, and her friends were killed, in the Brighton bombing. Obviously Starmer would have been upset by what happened at his old home, but surely that doesn’t mean he wouldn’t have read the speech before giving it? He’s not Ron Burgundy
What did @StillWaters mean by his mother’s observation that Keir Starmer had an “interesting approach to money?”
I think Keir is very boring, very timid. But can we please accept too that he’s that quite rare thing in British high office: a lower middle class striver.
The last one was John Major. And before him, basically nobody.
Likes a freebie. When he was DPP he charged the taxpayer for a chauffeur driven car to take him to work and back when it was 20 mins on the tube
As I understand it, he had to travel a lot inside the UK and the car was to facilitate that. No different I’d suggest to what I guess a Cabinet Minister has access to.
Why does he not travel under hmrc rules for travel that applies to all companies?
HMRC is not the authority on how public or private sector companies manage executive travel.
Indeed, any company can offer transportation for their employees.
Not though from home to home office...that is taxable
And we know that aspect of the expense wasn’t taxed?
Do we have any evidence it was? Lets face it mp's and high muckety mucks seem to get away without paying a lot of shit the rest of us are taxed on frankly.....this is a man with a tax free pension from being dpp for fucks sake...you really think he was paying tax on this perk?
How has he got a tax free pension? Other than the usual tax treatment of pensions that is
That tells me some 1971 Act applies to Keir Starmer. I am sure you will tell me what the 1971 act does, and how many people it applies to (in fact, how many people have their own regulations doing so)
I think it removes the lifetime allowance cap, so it would be tax free above £1mn where tax would normally have been paid.
And is it unusual for such an arrangement to be made, or is it routinely made for people in certain circumstances? Indeed, why was the arrangement made for SKS?
I presume by tax free that contributions are tax free above the lifetime allowance limit, but he will pay income tax when he draws it in the normal way.
Do some reading, people ! All you have to do is google "DPP pensions exemption":
Just bumped off a full plane at Heathrow. First time that’s happened in many years
I hope you managed to secure plenty of freebies.
They are grovelling. Offering new flight, compo, free biz class return, free hotel when I arrive
I don’t really care. The most annoying thing is that I got up at 5am for this fecking flight and now I won’t fly until 3pm
AAAAAAARGH
Unlucky! The one time I was nearly bumped they offered me a flight in the jump seat (it was that long ago!) and I had a brilliant ride into Heathrow!
What is a “jump seat”??
It's extra fold out seat in the cockpit.
I doubt they ever offer that to anybody these days given terrorism concerns.
I got to go in the cockpit of a Virgin Atlantic 747 at 38,000 feet on 12 August 2001. Reckon I was one of the last to have that pleasure.
More innocent times...
As a teenager in the 1950s, I was invited into the signal box at Scremerston (just outside Berwick) and allowed to signal the actual 'Flying Scotsman' steam engine through on it's way to Edinburgh
I didn't realise just how much effort was required to pull the levers
It is a lifetime memory unavailable these days
Thanks to a kindly driver who saw me taking pics of his train, I managed to get a cab ride in the old A-Stock underground trains on the last day of East London Line operations in December 2007. That was when they converted the East London to London Overground, re-opening in 2010.
Oh that’s fantastic. I managed to travel on the East London line when I worked at Alstom in Golders. Took the afternoon off and went for a travel. One of the best times of my working life. I was there when we had the 100 years of the Northern Line celebration. It was great fun and I got a watch and some other gift as well as some cake. I was on an hourly rate as a contractor and I came in for that weekend to the depot. We had some old rolling stock in, 1938 IIRC, and I got to shepherd excited train fans into and out of the drivers carriage where they got to sit down and look at the buttons.
What did @StillWaters mean by his mother’s observation that Keir Starmer had an “interesting approach to money?”
I think Keir is very boring, very timid. But can we please accept too that he’s that quite rare thing in British high office: a lower middle class striver.
The last one was John Major. And before him, basically nobody.
Likes a freebie. When he was DPP he charged the taxpayer for a chauffeur driven car to take him to work and back when it was 20 mins on the tube
As I understand it, he had to travel a lot inside the UK and the car was to facilitate that. No different I’d suggest to what I guess a Cabinet Minister has access to.
Why does he not travel under hmrc rules for travel that applies to all companies?
HMRC is not the authority on how public or private sector companies manage executive travel.
Indeed, any company can offer transportation for their employees.
Not though from home to home office...that is taxable
And we know that aspect of the expense wasn’t taxed?
Do we have any evidence it was? Lets face it mp's and high muckety mucks seem to get away without paying a lot of shit the rest of us are taxed on frankly.....this is a man with a tax free pension from being dpp for fucks sake...you really think he was paying tax on this perk?
Oh, come off it. If you are making the accusation the onus is on you.
Well seeing as its impossible to get his tax records no one can provide evidence except circumstantial such as making sure he wouldn't even pay income tax on his golden pension when most people are subject to it. We also know for a fact that all politicians don't get taxed for a lot of shit that everyday people do so yes sorry I absolutely believe till he disproves it that he wasn't taxed like one of the little people on his chauffeur driven perk. So do most people....proof indeed isn't even relevant its politics. Its what voters believe that counts not what is true and Starmer has demonstrated time and time again his venality for not paying for shit that normal people have to
What a load of waffle trying to defend a completely unsubstantiated allegation.
Do you disagree Starmer has a pension for being dpp that is not subject to income tax? Do you disagree Starmer has not taken freebies such as suits, glasses, concert and football tickets?
Why is this in your mind for circumstantial evidence for suggesting he never paid benefit in kind tax for a chauffeur driven car from home to office?
I can't prove he didn't without hacking hmrc....you can't prove he did....however given he avoids paying for anything he doesn't absolutely have to I think the balance of probabilities is on my side. If he doesn't like my opinion he can sue me and prove me wrong by providing his tax returns in a court of law
More waffle. If you are going to claim someone has been doing something illegally, you should have the evidence to back it up.
Let him sue....all mp's are tax avoiders, within the spirit of the law because they exempted themselves from the tax laws they pass for everyone else. I didn't say he did it illegally I said he didn't pay tax that normal people would have been expected to pay because pretty sure there will be some exemption somewhere in the tax code for people like him
Shut up, before you get the site into trouble.
Also can you provide evidence that you don't bugger goats every Friday and the first Saturday of the month.
Well does evidence of me only buggering goats on mondays and tuesdays count?
It's more, you once petted a goat and hand-fed it some grass, so you obviously regularly bugger them
What did @StillWaters mean by his mother’s observation that Keir Starmer had an “interesting approach to money?”
I think Keir is very boring, very timid. But can we please accept too that he’s that quite rare thing in British high office: a lower middle class striver.
The last one was John Major. And before him, basically nobody.
Likes a freebie. When he was DPP he charged the taxpayer for a chauffeur driven car to take him to work and back when it was 20 mins on the tube
As I understand it, he had to travel a lot inside the UK and the car was to facilitate that. No different I’d suggest to what I guess a Cabinet Minister has access to.
Why does he not travel under hmrc rules for travel that applies to all companies?
HMRC is not the authority on how public or private sector companies manage executive travel.
Indeed, any company can offer transportation for their employees.
Not though from home to home office...that is taxable
And we know that aspect of the expense wasn’t taxed?
Do we have any evidence it was? Lets face it mp's and high muckety mucks seem to get away without paying a lot of shit the rest of us are taxed on frankly.....this is a man with a tax free pension from being dpp for fucks sake...you really think he was paying tax on this perk?
We know from Currygate and Freebiegate that Starmer knows precisely where the lines are drawn and how to stay just on the right side of them, and from Partygate how to oust Prime Ministers who step over them. So yes, I'd expect Starmer's car use to have been wholly within the letter if not the spirit of tax law.
He claims he can't even read his own fucking speech
He's just making too many minor speeches. Silly for ministers, much worse for PMs.
What did @StillWaters mean by his mother’s observation that Keir Starmer had an “interesting approach to money?”
I think Keir is very boring, very timid. But can we please accept too that he’s that quite rare thing in British high office: a lower middle class striver.
The last one was John Major. And before him, basically nobody.
Likes a freebie. When he was DPP he charged the taxpayer for a chauffeur driven car to take him to work and back when it was 20 mins on the tube
As I understand it, he had to travel a lot inside the UK and the car was to facilitate that. No different I’d suggest to what I guess a Cabinet Minister has access to.
Why does he not travel under hmrc rules for travel that applies to all companies?
HMRC is not the authority on how public or private sector companies manage executive travel.
Indeed, any company can offer transportation for their employees.
Not though from home to home office...that is taxable
And we know that aspect of the expense wasn’t taxed?
Do we have any evidence it was? Lets face it mp's and high muckety mucks seem to get away without paying a lot of shit the rest of us are taxed on frankly.....this is a man with a tax free pension from being dpp for fucks sake...you really think he was paying tax on this perk?
We know from Currygate and Freebiegate that Starmer knows precisely where the lines are drawn and how to stay just on the right side of them, and from Partygate how to oust Prime Ministers who step over them. So yes, I'd expect Starmer's car use to have been wholly within the letter if not the spirit of tax law.
He claims he can't even read his own fucking speech
As has been pointed out, the speech was made hours after somebody tried to burn his family members alive, which was second such fire related to Starmer.
His attention may have been elsewhere.
Mrs T managed to give a speech in Brighton the day she escaped death, and her friends were killed, in the Brighton bombing. Obviously Starmer would have been upset by what happened at his old home, but surely that doesn’t mean he wouldn’t have read the speech before giving it? He’s not Ron Burgundy
Politicians are people, some people react differently to the same events.
Comments
"In rejecting the concept of the universal injunction, the Supreme Court reaffirmed the proper role of the federal courts within our constitutional system."
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/06/28/opinion/birthright-citizenship-supreme-court-injunction.html
It’s becoming notable in my workplace.
And it’s sad, and ultimately cretinizing.
I had occasion to look up the difference between I will/I shall on Google the other day. The AI now just suggests that I shall is merely a British variant…
Government in this country is both authoritarian and incompetent.
It’s not as nice as beef biltong but it’s okay.
There’s a nice pub by the level crossing in Wylam.
Worth having a jar. During Covid when we went for a walk there I’d get a milk carton of Jakehead for the walk back to the car.
They seem to believe that they can do anything but the State must play by the Rules of Conkers. Or something.
Edit : would prefer that they were given what the French police (still) refer to as “passer à tabac”
https://x.com/johnrentoul/status/1938581144284651916?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q
Continuing policies that the last 40 years have shown don't work is insanity which is why lab, con, ld aren't worth voting for in the minds of most.....just carry on despite the last 40 years showing they don't work....yeah just fuck that.
Corbyn would have least have tried something different and maybe I am wrong in thinking he is wrong. But the main point is the status quo does not work for most so needs to change which is why I do intend to vote next election and will vote for the party offering change from the status quo that is most able to win be that green, reform, peace for gaza or whatever.....we need rid of the centrists and they need reducing to a comedy clown car level of mps
I think Keir is very boring, very timid.
But can we please accept too that he’s that quite rare thing in British high office: a lower middle class striver.
The last one was John Major. And before him, basically nobody.
Is he really claiming that he said "Island of strangers" accidentally?
Is that something that competent lawyers do?
A few tweets from the real world about Starmer
Earlier chatting to a friend and the chat turned to the interview where Starmer talked of clearing out his brother’s flat after his death
My view is that almost everyone can empathise with the grief he must’ve felt and being PM adds to the difficulty of the situation
The terror attacks on his and his wife’s property add to the awful situation
… my friend said fine - I get all of that and one of the qualities I look for in any politician is that they understand and experience real stuff… I nodded
And then came “but I don’t want a PM I am asked to feel sorry for, it is almost as though in any difficult situation we hear a snippet of how difficult his life has been or is. It is starting to sound weird”
I hadn’t actually thought of it like that before but now I can’t get it out of my head
https://x.com/forwardnotback/status/1938945547164860854?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q
The grown ups are back in the room
Perhaps Callaghan and Wilson as well but the latter's background was more solidly middle class
The future Labour leader put nearly three times as much on expenses as his CPS successor Alison Saunders, including first class flights abroad and a chauffeur driven car.
Sir Keir charged taxpayers £161,273 for the vehicle and driver despite living just four miles and a direct Tube ride from the Crown Prosecution Service offices.
The car cost taxpayers an average of £1,920 a week for nearly two years until he stopped using it following embarrassing media reports.
Sir Keir served as Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) for five years from 2008-13.
His successor Alison Saunders, who was also DPP for five years, spent £67,340, less than a third of Sir Keir’s total.“
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/keir-starmer-expenses-chauffeur-driven-car-b2319779.html
I don’t really see a smoking gun here.
British public life tends to the punitively spartan if you ask me.
I bet Chez Starmer bathroom is jammed full of tiny bottles of showergel and shampoo he has brought back with him from all the hotels he has been staying in over the last 11 months.
I have placed three tiny bets on long shots. £2 each on Draper, Fritz, Musetti.
People are funny. Perhaps lawyers above all.
A few years ago, ER's SPotY enriched several PBers' betting accounts. Yours truly was a late convert.
New figures show that applications from the UK for golden visas in countries such as Greece and Portugal have risen sharply over the past year. Greece has become a popular destination, with golden visa applications from the UK having surged by almost 50 per cent since last summer. Portugal also registered a sharp jump (66.2 per cent increase), in the number of Britons applying for its golden visa scheme last year.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2025/06/28/middle-classes-flee-britain-for-med-after-reeves-tax-raids/
A lady who deleted a tweet an hour later is in jail for years in the same nation
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2013/2588/contents/made
It was a dog whistle for Reform, that isn't working, and those on the left have heard the dog whistle and screamed Enoch Powell / Right Far Adjacent Enabler, and so he is trying to win back the left by claiming somebody else wrote it and he wouldn't have said it if he knew.
You don't make major relaunch statements without that speech not been carefully written weeks before and multiple drafts and demands for feedback / edits from the PM.
I was extremely poor in those days, in an oversized dead man’s suit I had got from a charity shop.
Context - the structure of the paramilitaries was quite feudal. Each unit had a boss who was often the owner of a business (or businesses). The foot soldiers were unemployed, but hired (for cash) on the black to said businesses by said bosses. So removing unemployment benefit would have broken the business model.
The proposal was rejected.
Equally, a proposal to replace the propellant powder in cached terrorist firearms with RDX was nixed. The idea was to randomly do this to some bullets. When fired they would explode, destroying the gun and maiming the person firing it. Seemed like a good idea to me.
Do you disagree Starmer has not taken freebies such as suits, glasses, concert and football tickets?
Why is this in your mind for circumstantial evidence for suggesting he never paid benefit in kind tax for a chauffeur driven car from home to office?
I can't prove he didn't without hacking hmrc....you can't prove he did....however given he avoids paying for anything he doesn't absolutely have to I think the balance of probabilities is on my side. If he doesn't like my opinion he can sue me and prove me wrong by providing his tax returns in a court of law
The issue is rather that he’s done another u-turn, cementing his reputation as a man without any fixed vision or ideology.
Apparently Downing Street are enraged by the Observer’s portrayal which is supposed to be both faithful and sympathetic.
His attention may have been elsewhere.
RATM had this playbook 20+ years ago, with support of the likes of the Zapatista, but the difference is they made ionic music and Tom Morello is a guitar genius.
If you're getting a Vanilla error or unable to access the comments through the main website we believe this is related to the Vanilla upgrades that are scheduled to last until the 4th of July.
Also can you provide evidence that you don't bugger goats every Friday and the first Saturday of the month.
A politician more concerned with his image would have asked himself, "How will this look?" Instead Starmer just saw it as a routine speech until he unexpectedly got a backlash for it.
The Tankies should be all for stringing up Saboteurs - they were always justifying Stalin doing that to anyone he called a Saboteur or a Wrecker....
*As codified in the early Hague conventions. You have to give them a nice trial, with no drum head court martials and a last cigarette.
"making sure he wouldn't even pay income tax on his golden pension when most people are subject to it"
marks you out as someone who doesn't understand what they're talking about. His DPP pension is exempt from the lifetime allowance, not from income tax generally. It's the same deal as judges get. (In fact AIUI technically speaking his DPP pension is ALL taxable, there is no tax free lump sum allowance, but any lump sum is grossed up to compensate for the tax on it.)
The value of that deal is lessened anyway by the scrapping of the lifetime allowance in the dog days of the last Tory government.
He is also still doing deflection, well it was others who wrote it, they didn't understand. A leader would say, I got it wrong. There was a lot going on, reference the terrible attack, but I got it wrong, I apologise for those offended by it, end of statement.
I presume by tax free that contributions are tax free above the lifetime allowance limit, but he will pay income tax when he draws it in the normal way.
She shot down a number of stupid proposals, and instead picked a dual approach that led to the PIRA, eventually, calling a ceasefire.
From what I have read the Island of Strangers speech didn't go through the usual prep the arson events, his security detail were on a high level.
Remember at the time it was felt to be state linked terror and it may well turn out to be the case.
When Dave screwed up over the Aston Villa/West Ham thing the first version was talking about watching the West Indies growing up until the penultimate version.
https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/starmer-still-quids-in-even-if-labour-scraps-tax-break-rjl8w2txv
These arrangements WERE routine. Starmer's was the last before the system changed, but that's hardly his fault.