`I was a trade union official for 25 years for 8 different trade unions.
The most expensive gifts I ever got were the occasional bottle of wine or box of chocolates – and a couple of books – from members I had represented. I always traveled second class train. I rarely took taxis if there was an alternative. I wore Marks and Spencer suits and shirts which I paid for myself. As for clothing I didn’t get so much as a gift of free underpants. I was once called in by the Head of Finance at MSF (now Unite) to query my expenses because they were one third of my predecessor’s even though I did twice as much travelling. He wanted to understand why.
I once worked for a Trade Union General Secretary who was repeatedly alleged to have diverted boxes of wine meant for union receptions to his home, and used the union’s chauffeur to take his kids to Arsenal away matches. Sorry, it had to be Arsenal again.
You can probably guess where I am going with this.
Along with many others I was constantly critical of the sleaze on a grand scale under the last 14 years of Conservative rule. Ive just read this today:
Sir Keir Starmer, Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner and Chancellor Rachel Reeves will not accept any further donations for clothing after a row over gifts, a Downing Street source has said. The prime minister has faced growing criticism after it emerged he had received more than £16,000 for work clothing and spectacles for him, and further donations for his wife, from Labour peer Waheed Alli.
A government that is cutting winter fuel allowances and telling us that ”hard choices” times are ahead for most people must be absolutely bonkers to accept such gifts. If a wealthy peer has clothes to give away, why not donate them to a clothes bank to people who really need them? How does Kier Starmer justify accepting glasses costing £2400? How many suits does he need?
There is absolutely no way that any cabinet minister, let alone Keir Starmer, needs any gift of clothes, glasses – or even underpants. In addition to an MP's salary of £84,144 he receives an additional £75,440 as Prime Minister – and free lodging and has had a decent salary all his working life..
The optics are catastrophic and play straight into the hands of the “politicians are only in it for themselves” narrative.
Kier Starmer is not Boris Johnson. Labour will struggle to get remotely near the rampant sleaze of the last Tory Government. But it got worse. I then read that Angela Rayner and Rachel Reeves had declared thousands of pounds in work clothing from wealthy donors as general office support. https://www.ft.com/content/2a218255-c08e-4091-8c7a-f51dd46795be
“General office support”?? Did Sue Gray - who knows about these things – not remind Ministers of Nolan Principle No 2 which states:
“Holders of public office must avoid placing themselves under any obligation to people or organisations that might try inappropriately to influence them in their work. They should not act or take decisions in order to gain financial or other material benefits for themselves, their family, or their friends. They must declare and resolve any interests and relationships.” https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-7-principles-of-public-life/the-7-principles-of-public-life--2
It is bad enough accepting gifts you don’t need at a time when services to the poorest in society are under threat. It looks seriously dodgy to list them as “office support”
In politics and public service, what leaders do (or don’t do) sets the culture of the organisation they lead. When leaders don’t model the behaviours they say they expect of others that sets the culture of the organisation. Any NHS or local government chief executive or any civil servant who accepted gifts on this scale (never mind then tried to hide them) would stand accused of gross misconduct.
Long after this episode has passed it will be remembered not only by the hypocritical right wing media but by everyone who struggles to make ends meet – and many others.
It is stupidity beyond belief.
Comments