His acceptance of football tickets has proved particularly contentious, with some government officials reportedly concerned about a potential conflict of interest.
But what exactly has Sir Keir been criticised for, what are his party’s concerns, and what has he said about it?
Specifically, it was revealed Lord Alli, former chairman of online fashion retailer Asos, paid for a personal shopper, clothes, and alterations for Lady Victoria Starmer both before and after the Labour leader became prime minister in July.
Image: Sir Keir Starmer with wife Lady Victoria after election win in July. Pic: PA
MPs are required to register gifts and donations within 28 days of receiving them, but it is understood the donations for Lady Starmer’s clothes were submitted late.
Advertisement
Conservatives have been calling for an investigation into the potential breach of rules, which a spokesperson for Number 10 said was an oversight that had been corrected.
“We believed we’d been compliant, however, following further interrogation this month, we’ve declared further items,” the spokesperson told Sky News.
Sir Keir has also received – and disclosed – other gifts from Lord Alli totalling £39,122.
These donations included an unspecified donation of accommodation worth £20,437, “work clothing” worth £16,200, and multiple pairs of glasses equivalent to £2,485.
Some Tory MPs have condemned Sir Keir for accepting the gifts at all, with shadow science and technology secretary Andrew Griffith saying: “It beggars belief that the prime minister thinks it’s acceptable that pensioners on £13,000 a year can afford to heat their home when he earns 12 times that but apparently can’t afford to clothe himself or his wife.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
7:40
PM’s freebies explained
Football tickets
The Premier League is one of the biggest donors of hospitality, and Sir Keir – a renowned Arsenal fan – has received almost £40,000 in tickets overall since December 2019.
He has declared £12,588 of gifts from the Premier League, numerous hospitality tickets to Arsenal matches costing well over £10,000 in total, plus two Euros finals tickets costing £1,628 and thousands of pounds’ worth of tickets from other Premier League clubs.
Image: Sir Keir Starmer in the stands of Premier League match between Brighton and Arsenal in April. Pic: PA
Sky News has learnt officials are warning the prime minister that he could be opening himself up to inappropriate lobbying by continuing to accept football tickets, as the government is planning to set up an Independent Football Regulator for the professional men’s game.
Ministers are usually told to avoid hospitality from any organisation connected to an ongoing government regulatory decision.
Talk over his gifts, which include four tickets to a Taylor Swift concert totalling £4,000, also comes amid controversy over the prices concert-goersand football fans are having to pay to attend events.
What has Starmer said in response to criticism?
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
0:38
PM wants ‘transparency’ over donations
Speaking to journalists this week, the prime minister said “all MPs get gifts” and he thinks the need to declare them is “a good framework”.
“Wherever there are gifts from anyone, I’m going to comply with the rules,” he said.
“It’s very important to me that the rules are followed. I’ve always said that. I said that before the election. I reinforced it after the election.
“And that’s why shortly after the election, my team reached out for advice on what declarations should be made so it’s in accordance with the rules.
“They then sought out for further advice more recently, as a result of which they’ve made the relevant declarations.”
On his acceptance of Arsenal tickets, he added: “I’m a massive Arsenal fan. I can’t go into the stands because of security reasons. Therefore, if I don’t accept a gift of hospitality, I can’t go to a game. You could say: ‘Well, bad luck’.
“That’s why gifts have to be registered. But… never going to an Arsenal game again because I can’t accept hospitality is pushing it a bit far.”
Another of the opposition’s critiques of the PM has been his so-called “hypocrisy”.
On Sunday, former home secretary and Tory leadership hopeful James Cleverly told Sky News Sir Keir was “very, very critical of the Conservatives” over similar controversies and had “basically got his job by criticising others”.
While Sir Keir didn’t comment on gifts during his election campaign, he regularly labelled former PM Rishi Sunak and his government as “out of touch” with the public’s financial struggles.
Some of the PM’s cabinet members have leapt to his defence – though with differing arguments in his favour.
Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds told Sky News Sir Keir works “incredibly hard” and therefore deserves a “wider life experience” rather than simply working every second of the day.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:35
Business secretary: ‘No objection’ to Starmer gifts
Foreign Secretary David Lammy has argued prime ministers and their spouses must “look their best” on the world stage, and therefore accepting gifts of clothes is acceptable when there is no taxpayer-funded budget for it.
But there have been murmurings of discontent within the Labour Party, with some backbenchers telling Sky News they are deeply frustrated with the way this story has been handled by Sir Keir’s top team.
The chancellor has said she was having a “tough day” yesterday in her first public comments since appearing tearful at Prime Minister’s Questions – but insisted she is “totally” up for the job.
Rachel Reeves told broadcasters: “Clearly I was upset yesterday and everyone could see that. It was a personal issue and I’m not going to go into the details of that.
“My job as chancellor at 12 o’clock on a Wednesday is to be at PMQs next to the prime minister, supporting the government, and that’s what I tried to do.
“I guess the thing that maybe is a bit different between my job and many of your viewers’ is that when I’m having a tough day it’s on the telly and most people don’t have to deal with that.”
She declined to give a reason behind the tears, saying “it was a personal issue” and “it wouldn’t be right” to divulge it.
“People saw I was upset, but that was yesterday. Today’s a new day and I’m just cracking on with the job,” she added.
More on Rachel Reeves
Related Topics:
Ms Reeves also said she is “totally” up for the job of chancellor, saying: “This is the job that I’ve always wanted to do. I’m proud of what I’ve delivered as chancellor.”
Image: Reeves was seen wiping away tears during PMQs. Pic: PA
Asked if she was surprised that Sir Keir Starmer did not back her more strongly during PMQs, she reiterated that she and the prime minister are a “team”, saying: “We fought the election together, we changed the Labour Party together so that we could be in the position to return to power, and over the past year, we’ve worked in lockstep together.”
PM: ‘I was last to appreciate’ that Reeves was crying
The chancellor’s comments come after the prime minister told Sky News’ political editor Beth Rigby that he “didn’t appreciate” that she was crying behind him at Prime Minister’s Questions yesterday because the weekly sessions are “pretty wild”, which is why he did not offer her any support while in the chamber.
He added: “It wasn’t just yesterday – no prime minister ever has had side conversations during PMQs. It does happen in other debates when there’s a bit more time, but in PMQs, it is bang, bang, bang. That’s what it was yesterday.
“And therefore, I was probably the last to appreciate anything else going on in the chamber, and that’s just a straightforward human explanation, common sense explanation.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:03
Starmer explains to Beth Rigby his reaction to Reeves crying in PMQs
During PMQs, Tory leader Kemi Badenoch branded the chancellor the “human shield” for the prime minister’s “incompetence” just hours after he was forced to perform a humiliating U-turn over his controversial welfare bill, leaving a “black hole” in the public finances.
The prime minister’s watered-down Universal Credit and Personal Independent Payment Bill was backed by a majority of 75 in a tense vote on Tuesday evening – but a total of 49 Labour MPs voted against the bill, which was the largest rebellion in a prime minister’s first year in office since 47 MPs voted against Tony Blair’s lone parent benefit in 1997, according to Professor Phil Cowley from Queen Mary University.
Reeves looks transformed – but this has been a disastrous week for the PM
It is a Rachel Reeves transformed that appears in front of the cameras today, nearly 24 hours since one of the most extraordinary PMQs.
Was there a hint of nervousness as she started, aware of the world watching for any signs of human emotion? Was there a touch of feeling in her face as the crowds applauded her?
People will speculate. But Ms Reeves has got through her first public appearance, and can now, she hopes, move on.
The prime minister embraced her as he walked on stage, the health secretary talked her up: “Thanks to her leadership, we have seen wages rising faster than the cost of living.”
A show of solidarity at the top of government, a prime minister and chancellor trying to get on with business.
But be in no doubt today’s speech on a 10-year-plan for the NHS has been overshadowed. Not just by a chancellor in tears, but what that image represents.
A PM who, however assured he appeared today, has marked his first year this week, as Sky News’ political editor Beth Rigby put to him, with a “self-inflicted shambles”.
She asked: “How have you got this so wrong? How can you rebuild trust? Are you just in denial?”
They are questions Starmer will be grappling with as he tries to move past a disastrous week.
Ms Reeves has borne a lot of the criticism over the handling of the vote, with some MPs believing that her strict approach to fiscal rules has meant she has approached the ballooning welfare bill from the standpoint of trying to make savings, rather than getting people into work.
Ms Badenoch also said the chancellor looked “absolutely miserable”, and questioned whether she would remain in post until the next election.
Sir Keir did not explicitly say that she will, and Ms Badenoch interjected to say: “How awful for the chancellor that he couldn’t confirm that she would stay in place.”
Downing Street scrambled to make clear to journalists that Ms Reeves was “going nowhere”, and the prime minister has since stated publicly that she will remain as chancellor “for many years to come”.