The Emperor’s New Clothes
Well we can safely say this Labour Government is not off to a popular start. Take your pick of unpopular decisions, winter fuel payment, two child benefit cap, the blame the Tory’s for everything line, or the commitment to carbon capture. I know they say all publicity is good publicity, but there’s a limit.
However, in the past couple of weeks there has been a row over gift-giving, specifically clothes. It turns out the newly elected Prime Minister loves a good freebie. There was me thinking I had nothing in common with him. But in his position it’s not a very good look.
The most notable of the freebies was a £16,000 donation for clothes and spectacles. A startling £2,500 of that went towards eyewear. Now this quite frankly produces more questions than answers. How many glasses does one need, even if they are running a country? How special are these glasses? Or little do we know is Kier wearing a solid gold pair of spectacles inside number 10.
Furthermore, not to sound to day-time-televisiony but that’s a lot of money to look that unremarkable. Is he spending that money on suits to look like a man of the people. If so, just head to Marks and Spencer’s. I’ve never really heard anyone say, “well even though the economic hardship is set to continue it was good to see Keir rocking that gorgeous wool suit, his tie really brough out his eyes”.
In all seriousness though, the problem isn’t the suits it’s who bought them. If Keir wants to blow it all on Savile Row fair play to the guy. However he can use his combined income of over £200,000 he shares with his wife. When his gifted suits etc mean doners get VIP treatment and influence over Government then it needs to be stopped.
With all that eyewear even Starmer should see this is not the best start, and not very different from the previous Government. And considering their election campaign and current government seems to be built on ‘we’re not the Torys’ that’s a problem. To the defenders of Kier who say at least he declared it, that’s barely a brag or something to be proud of.
Of course he wasn’t the only one caught up in it all. Rachael Reeves, Angela Reyner and Victoria Starmer all had to wiggle their way out of uncomfortable questions surrounding clothes donations.
His defence of this clothes-gate has been both melodramatic and weak. Call me cold but playing the sob story to the nation that you’d never go to a football match without free hospitality isn’t going to cut it for the cold granny this winter. I get the security issues, but you could actually pay to be there. At least he can call himself an actual football fan unlike David Cameron who proved on more than one occasion he’s probably more of a cricket man.
His Taylor Swift and Coldplay excuses were also rather puzzling and not in keeping with the man who was going to “clear out the Tory rot”. Was that so he could roll in and accept their dregs.
The setting for all of us finding out about Starmer’s £4000 Taylor Swift hospitality and other freebies is in the run up to the doom budget. The past couple months has all been about giving people the fear until we’re all a jittering messes just happy that the wait is finally over and the budget has been announced.
To make us feel better Starmer and cohort will no longer receive donations for clothes. But does that mean everything else is still on the table? I don’t feel very reassured. Even less so since Starmer tried to put to bed clothes-gate and the news that Sue Gray’s pay is more than his own by telling us all he’s “completely in control”. If you need to say it, it’s probably not true.
Taking donations and freebies just undermines impartiality and gets politicians often muddled up with people you don’t want anywhere near the big decisions. Take Lord Alli who’s at the centre of clothes-gate. Having donated over £700,000 to Labour over the past two decades, not only is he in possession of a peerage, bestowed onto him by Tony Blair, but he now has his hands on a juicy Downing Street pass. An investment banker who seems to have interests in offshore tax havens, he states he wants nothing in return for his donations. Which is hard to believe when he had a pass to Downing Street.
All MPs do it, says the MPs. Freebies are part of the game, part of the job. Well why should it be? What good does it do for the country exactly? Many of them work hard no doubt about it (though not all), but your nurse, police officer, social worker and school teacher also works hard, and they don’t get freebies. But then they don’t influence decision making, so no Tay-Tay for them.
No good can come from it when politicians are getting personal gifts. The US political system is built on this model of lobbying it’s a multibillion-dollar industry and it’s a mess.
Just because it’s an accepted behaviour around MP’s doesn’t mean we should accept it. And with cabinet nearing £1 million pounds in accepted freebies this year, they sure won’t stop it unless they are made to.
In a similar vein the Greens have been accused of cash for access in a much more upfront display of lobbying. Supposedly offering up access to politicians and party members in exchange for a ‘sponsored lunch’ at a cost of £700. Although they deny this is in breach of the Scottish Government’s lobbying laws there are many who believe it is. Some members of the Green’s sniff a cover-up job with co-leaders Patrick Harvie and Lorna Slater not owning up and taking any responsibility for the matters.
The bottom line is a politician’s ear nor vote should be bought. Nothing good ever comes from politicians being susceptible to extravagant gifts, although they perceive it as normal it shouldn’t be. The more gifts there are the more meaningful legislation is pushed aside.
