THE ongoing soap opera of Sir Keir Starmer’s freebies has had more plot twists than a Netflix mini-series.
It is, after all, pretty astonishing that a man on a six-figure salary should be handed gifts of free designer suits, as well as frocks for his wife, by a generous multi-millionaire at a time when so many are struggling to pay bills.
It’s staggering that a politician who sold himself to the nation as Mr Rules was happy to accept £107,000 of free clothes, concert and football tickets and use of a luxury penthouse apartment, without any worry that it might look hypocritical to the rest of us.
And it’s something of a shock that a Labour politician who accused the Tories of having their snouts in the trough seems to have no qualms when a Labour donor doles out the goodies to HIM.
It’s also pretty amazing that Starmer thought he could move his entire family into his rich mate’s £18million penthouse for more than six weeks and we wouldn’t find out about it.
But even that’s not the most bizarre aspect of this story.
No, the MOST surprising thing about this whole saga is that a man who made a career for many years as a top-flight barrister has run out of decent arguments in his own defence.
As we have moved seamlessly from Frockgate to Flatgate — with barely time to grab freebie tickets to an Arsenal match in between — so the Prime Minister’s explanations and justifications have changed too.
He started with, “I’ve done nothing wrong” but, when that failed to stem the negative headlines, changed his defence to, “I followed all the rules”.
When that line didn’t pass muster, the PM dug deep and went for the sympathy plea instead, insisting his actions were for family reasons.
First, he claimed he only accepted the free tickets to a box at Arsenal’s Emirates stadium so he could take his son to matches despite security concerns.
We have moved seamlessly from Frockgate to Flatgate — with barely time to grab freebie tickets to an Arsenal match in between
Then, this week, Sir Keir again thrust his teenage son forward.
He told the BBC he moved his family into Labour donor Lord Alli’s luxury apartment in London’s Covent Garden because he was worried that his “boy” could fail his GCSEs because he was “disturbed” by journalists gathered outside their family home.
“Any parent would have made the same decision,” the Prime Minister insisted.
Except, of course, that most parents don’t have a multi-millionaire mate like Lord Alli.
The trouble with Starmer’s never-ending stories about why he accepted the Labour donor’s largesse is that they simply don’t add up.
Don’t you think that if there were throngs of media — or protesters — outside the Starmer house, we would have read about it sooner?
If the PM’s son’s GCSEs were the reason for the family staying at the penthouse, then why did the Starmers stay on a full month after all the exams had ended?
Starmer Snr also claims on the MPs’ register of interests that the loan of the luxury flat was worth £20,000 — which works out at about a laughably low £450 a night.
Once again we have a Prime Minister who thinks he can get away with SAYING one thing but DOING another
Now it’s emerged that he also used Lord Alli’s flat for a TV broadcast in December 2021, urging people to work from home during Covid — and with a carefully placed family photo apparently aimed at deceiving voters into thinking the then-Labour leader was in his OWN home at the time.
This ongoing saga of freebies is about more than mere frocks or penthouse flats, it’s about integrity and trust.
Sadly, the least surprising thing about this whole soap opera is that once again we have a Prime Minister who thinks he can get away with SAYING one thing but DOING another.
Sir Keir Starmer KC may have led many a prosecution over the years, but he has yet to make a convincing case for his own defence.
WE’VE been promised a “painful” Budget next month, with Chancellor Rachel Reeves threatening a raid not just on our wallets but our FUN too.
Whether it’s fast food, booze or cigarettes, it looks like all our favourite indulgences will be slammed with extra taxes to make them cost us more.
These so-called “sin taxes” are justified as ways to direct people toward making healthier choices, and also to raise money to cover the costs of our UNHEALTHY choices. But drinkers and smokers already pay billions in taxes that the Government can put toward paying for the NHS.
That’s assuming there will be anywhere left to have a pint or a fag amid plans to ban smoking in beer gardens, and even talk of cutting the hours pubs can stay open.
The sin taxes won’t stop us indulging, though.
With all this doom and gloom, our guilty pleasures will be all we’ll have left to get us through the dark winter months.
THE prisoner early-release scheme has been a disaster.
Not only were 37 lags, including stalkers and wife-beaters, WRONGLY freed under the scheme because their offences had been incorrectly logged under outdated legislation, but five of them are STILL free on our streets.
Now we learn that one in five of the prisoners freed from HMP Winchester two weeks ago have ALREADY been returned to their cells for breaching their licence conditions.
Just imagine the huge amount of time, resources and taxpayers’ money spent on this whole farce.
All that effort to let convicts out a few weeks early, only for prisons to be full again a few months later.
Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood has egg, and porridge, all over her face.
