Connect with us

Published

on

The foreign secretary insists the prime minister is “seeking to comply with the rules” and an investigation into a Labour donor buying clothes for his wife is “not a transparency issue”.

Sir Keir Starmer is facing an investigation over a possible breach of parliamentary rules after failing to declare that some of his wife’s high-end clothes were bought for her by his biggest personal donor, Lord Alli.

The Labour peer paid for a personal shopper, clothes and alterations for Lady Victoria Starmer, reportedly both before and after the Labour leader became prime minister in July, according to The Sunday Times.

Newly elected Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer, with his wife Victoria Starmer, greet wellwishers as he arrives at his official London residence at No 10 Downing Street for the first time after the Labour party won a landslide victory at the 2024 General Election. Picture date: Friday July 5, 2024.
Image:
Sir Keir Starmer and his wife Victoria Starmer arrive at No 10 Downing Street after Labour’s election victory. Pic: PA

David Lammy defended Sir Keir when he appeared on Sky News’ Sunday Morning With Trevor Phillips.

Asked whether it was a bad look for the prime minister after promising to clean up politics, Mr Lammy said: “This is not a transparency issue. It’s actually the prime minister seeking to comply with the rules.”

Questioned further on whether Sir Keir and his wife needed to have clothes donated to them when the prime minister’s annual salary is around £160,000, Mr Lammy noted there is “no budget” for clothing for our prime minister, while in other countries, such as the US, there is a “substantial budget” so that when appearing on the world stage, they represent their countries well.

He added: “So it is the case that successive leaders of the opposition wanting to represent the country on an international stage, and prime ministers have used donors to fund that budget.”

More on Sir Keir Starmer

The foreign secretary also defended the Labour donor, Lord Alli, who had funded the gifts for Sir Keir and Lady Starmer.

Mr Lammy described him as a self-made millionaire who has been a supporter and a donor to the Labour Party over successive leaders and prime ministers.

Lord Alli in 2014. Pic: Rex
Image:
Lord Alli in 2014. Pic: Rex

This year, Sir Keir has received – and disclosed – nearly £19,000 worth of work clothes and several pairs of glasses from Lord Alli, the former chairman of online fashion retailer Asos, The Times reported.

In addition, the peer, whose personal wealth is estimated at £200m, spent £20,000 on accommodation for the now prime minister during the election and a similar sum on “private office” costs, which was also disclosed, the paper said.

A Number 10 spokesperson told Sky News it was an oversight that had been corrected after it “sought advice from the authorities on coming to office”.

They added: “We believed we’d been compliant, however, following further interrogation this month, we’ve declared further items.”

This story will sting after win based on promises of service and professionalism

The last two prime ministers who walked into 10 Downing Street promised to bring a level of professionalism into politics.

In his first speech, Rishi Sunak said he wanted his government to have “integrity, professionalism and accountability” at every level. Two years later, Sir Keir Starmer said he wanted to restore trust to politics and that “to change Britain, we must change ourselves – we need to clean up politics”.

In fact, Labour’s argument throughout the election was basically that they weren’t the Conservatives. That they would bring public service back into politics – even labelling their government the “government of service”.

Which is why this story must sting so much.

It’s a small indiscretion, not nearly the realms of the chaos of the last administration, and it seems to be more cock up than deliberate, but it does show the perils of setting the standards so high for a government that wants to stand as the contrast to what came before.

It also has the risk of being damaging.

As trust in politicians has stooped to its lowest levels and people feel the levels of service in public life are waning, if a politician promises to be all above board in all respects then the public will expect them to be squeaky clean.

After facing interviews on Sunday morning – in which he said Vladimir Putin could not successfully bully the West over its support for Ukraine – Mr Lammy and Sir Keir watched the north London derby football match between Tottenham and Arsenal together.

The foreign secretary posted on X saying: “The boss’ team won this time against the run of play, but it’s still early in the season.”

The Tories called for a “full investigation” after The Sunday Times report.

A Conservative Party spokesman said: “It’s taken just 10 weeks for Keir Starmer to face an investigation for his conduct.

“After facing allegations of cronyism and now apparent serious breaches of parliamentary rules there must be a full investigation into the passes for glasses scandal.

“No doubt the millions of vulnerable pensioners across the country who face choosing between heating and eating would jump at the chance for free clothes just to keep warm in the face of Labour’s cruel cut.”

Read more from Sky News:
Tax the rich and spare pensioners, Davey says
No assessment carried out on winter fuel payment cut
Starmer talks up US-UK relationship after White House meeting

Sir Keir Starmer and his wife Victoria ont he campaign trail in London. Pic: PA
Image:
Sir Keir Starmer and his wife Victoria campaigning in London. Pic: PA

Lord Alli’s involvement with the Labour leader has already proved controversial after it emerged he had been given a Downing Street security pass without apparently having a government role.

Sir Keir, like all MPs, must declare any of his relevant interests under rules set up to protect politics from improper influence and uphold transparency.

Continue Reading

Politics

Rachel Reeves hit by Labour rural rebellion over inheritance tax on farmers

Published

on

By

Rachel Reeves hit by Labour rural rebellion over inheritance tax on farmers

Chancellor Rachel Reeves has suffered another budget blow with a rebellion by rural Labour MPs over inheritance tax on farmers.

Speaking during the final day of the Commons debate on the budget, Labour backbenchers demanded a U-turn on the controversial proposals.

Plans to introduce a 20% tax on farm estates worth more than £1m from April have drawn protesters to London in their tens of thousands, with many fearing huge tax bills that would force small farms to sell up for good.

Farmers have staged numerous protests against the tax in Westminster. Pic: PA
Image:
Farmers have staged numerous protests against the tax in Westminster. Pic: PA

MPs voted on the so-called “family farms tax” just after 8pm on Tuesday, with dozens of Labour MPs appearing to have abstained, and one backbencher – borders MP Markus Campbell-Savours – voting against, alongside Conservative members.

In the vote, the fifth out of seven at the end of the budget debate, Labour’s vote slumped from 371 in the first vote on tax changes, down by 44 votes to 327.

‘Time to stand up for farmers’

The mini-mutiny followed a plea to Labour MPs from the National Farmers Union to abstain.

“To Labour MPs: We ask you to abstain on Budget Resolution 50,” the NFU urged.

“With your help, we can show the government there is still time to get it right on the family farm tax. A policy with such cruel human costs demands change. Now is the time to stand up for the farmers you represent.”

After the vote, NFU president Tom Bradshaw said: “The MPs who have shown their support are the rural representatives of the Labour Party. They represent the working people of the countryside and have spoken up on behalf of their constituents.

“It is vital that the chancellor and prime minister listen to the clear message they have delivered this evening. The next step in the fight against the family farm tax is removing the impact of this unjust and unfair policy on the most vulnerable members of our community.”

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Farmers defy police ban in budget day protest in Westminster.

The government comfortably won the vote by 327-182, a majority of 145. But the mini-mutiny served notice to the chancellor and Sir Keir Starmer that newly elected Labour MPs from the shires are prepared to rebel.

Speaking in the debate earlier, Mr Campbell-Savours said: “There remain deep concerns about the proposed changes to agricultural property relief (APR).

“Changes which leave many, not least elderly farmers, yet to make arrangements to transfer assets, devastated at the impact on their family farms.”

Samantha Niblett, Labour MP for South Derbyshire abstained after telling MPs: “I do plead with the government to look again at APR inheritance tax.

“Most farmers are not wealthy land barons, they live hand to mouth on tiny, sometimes non-existent profit margins. Many were explicitly advised not to hand over their farm to children, (but) now face enormous, unexpected tax bills.

“We must acknowledge a difficult truth: we have lost the trust of our farmers, and they deserve our utmost respect, our honesty and our unwavering support.”

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

UK ‘criminally’ unprepared to feed itself in crisis, says farmers’ union.

Labour MPs from rural constituencies who did not vote included Tonia Antoniazzi (Gower), Julia Buckley (Shrewsbury), Jonathan Davies (Mid Derbyshire), Maya Ellis (Ribble Valley), and Anna Gelderd (South East Cornwall), Ben Goldsborough (South Norfolk), Alison Hume (Scarborough and Whitby), Terry Jermy (South West Norfolk), Jayne Kirkham (Truro and Falmouth), Noah Law (St Austell and Newquay), Perran Moon, (Camborne and Redruth), Samantha Niblett (South Derbyshire), Jenny Riddell-Carpenter (Suffolk Coastal), Henry Tufnell (Mid and South Pembrokeshire), John Whitby (Derbyshire Dales) and Steve Witherden (Montgomeryshire and Glyndwr).

Continue Reading

Politics

UK takes ‘massive step forward,’ passing property laws for crypto

Published

on

By

UK takes ‘massive step forward,’ passing property laws for crypto

The UK has passed a bill into law that treats digital assets, such as cryptocurrencies and stablecoins, as property, which advocates say will better protect crypto users.

Lord Speaker John McFall announced in the House of Lords on Tuesday that the Property (Digital Assets etc) Bill was given royal assent, meaning King Charles agreed to make the bill into an Act of Parliament and passed it into law.

Freddie New, policy chief at advocacy group Bitcoin Policy UK, said on X that the bill “becoming law is a massive step forward for Bitcoin in the United Kingdom and for everyone who holds and uses it here.”

Source: Freddie New

Common law in the UK, based on judges’ decisions, has established that digital assets are property, but the bill sought to codify a recommendation made by the Law Commission of England and Wales in 2024 that crypto be categorized as a new form of personal property for clarity.

“UK courts have already treated digital assets as property, but that was all through case-by-case judgments,” said the advocacy group CryptoUK. “Parliament has now written this principle into law.”

“This gives digital assets a much clearer legal footing — especially for things like proving ownership, recovering stolen assets, and handling them in insolvency or estate cases,” it added.

Digital “things” now considered personal property

CryptoUK said that the bill confirms “that digital or electronic ‘things’ can be objects of personal property rights.”

UK law categorizes personal property in two ways: a “thing in possession,” which is tangible property such as a car, and and a “thing in action,” intangible property, like the right to enforce a contract.

The bill clarifies that “a thing that is digital or electronic in nature” isn’t outside the realm of personal property rights just because it is neither a “thing in possession” nor a “thing in action.”

The Law Commission argued in its report in 2024 that digital assets can possess both qualities, and said that their unclear fit into property rights laws could hamstring dispute resolutions in court.

Related: Group of EU banks pushes for a euro-pegged stablecoin by 2027

Change gives “greater clarity” to crypto users

CryptoUK said on X that the law gives “greater clarity and protection for consumers and investors” and gives crypto holders “the same confidence and certainty they expect with other forms of property.”

“Digital assets can be clearly owned, recovered in cases of theft or fraud, and included within insolvency and estate processes,” it added.