[Politics] The Labour Government

[Herr Tubthumper]

But back to my original question Y or N ?

In 2024, No. In 2010, probably a Y.

 

[Chicken Run]

In 2024, No. In 2010, probably a Y.

In 2024, No. In 2010, probably a Y.

So in 2010 if Cam had received this gifts you wouldn’t see it as an issue and the public were overreacting but a N if were today

 

[jcdenton08]

In 2024, No. In 2010, probably a Y.

What if he wore a blue rosette? It’s okay to be honest and outright party political, you know. What you mean is “I hate the Tories, so if they do something morally ambiguous it’s wrong. But if Labour do it I’ll defend them, because I like Labour and I don’t like the Conservatives”.

That’s absolutely better than talking into corners…

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

So in 2010 if Cam had received this gifts you wouldn’t see it as an issue and the public were overreacting but a N if were today

As I say, probably. 2010 was 14 years ago. I was more reactionary and impulsive then. I sincerely hope we all have more informed and measured thoughts after such time.

 

[WATFORD zero]

Who is outraged, out of interest? I'm certainly not. It's a very senior role with a lot of responsibility. I've said on here, many times over the years, that senior government positions should pay far more than they do, more reflective of the significance of their roles. If nothing else, it may enable multi-millionaires to be able to clothe their own family, and not have to rely on handouts for prescription eyewear.

My gripe with you is your attempts to talk down Gray's salary by comparing it to civil servants because, despite your desparate squiriming, she's still not a civil servant. And by raising her salary again, you've further highlighted that. Gray isn't remunerated according to the well-established civil service pay bandings - that'll be because she's not a civil servant - but Special Adviser pay bands. As has been publicised over the last few days, these have recently been re-assessed, which permitted Gray to earn what she is.

The bands were previously:

The Cabinet Office is responsible for Special Adviser Pay Policy. There are four pay bands for special advisers as set out below.​

​

Pay Band 1 Junior Special Adviser - £40,500 to £53,000​

Pay Band 2 Special Adviser - £57,000 to £84,000​

Pay Band 3 Senior Special Adviser - £73,000 to £102,000​

Pay Band 4 Special Adviser Leadership - £102,000 to £145,000​

​

The people who ARE upset about Gray's salary are, it seems, all within Starmer's nor-so-happy government as Chris Mason detailed earlier...



This is further expanded upon in his blog on the BBC website today. I'm sure you've read it, but in case not...

​

But this story, at its crux, is not about her salary per se.​

​

It is about the levels of upset and anger - fair or otherwise - about her and her role at the top of government.​

​

That is what motivated the person who tipped me off - at considerable professional risk - to tell me what I am now telling you.​

​

And I know from other conversations I have had - and members of our BBC team have had - that this person is far from alone.​

​

And that tells you something about the fractious relationships among some at the top of government, less than three months after Labour won the election.​

Chris Mason: Why finding out about Sue Gray’s salary really matters

Chris Mason explains why the story about the prime minister's chief of staff earning £170,000 a year matters.

www.bbc.co.uk

Perhaps you should be directing your "Calm down - nothing to see here" into No.10, rather than NSC.

On wednesday, when this story broke, it was all about 'Sue Gray earns more than the Prime Minister'. So I pointed out that salaries higher than the PM aren't unusual at senior levels of Government and 200+ Civil Servants earn more than the PM (I could have said Political journalists, lobbyists etc but don't have any numbers on them).

This prompted you to say Sue Gray wasn't a civil servant, and it was pointed out that you were wrong.

We've since had a couple of long posts from you pointing out why Government Spads shouldn't be classified as Civil Servants. They both made very good points, but I'm afraid you're preaching to the converted. I have said on this thread and many other posts over a number of years that I don't think Spads should be Civil Servants, but the sad fact is that unless the Government and Civil Service re-classify them, they will remain Civil Servants, paid by the taxpayer, much to the pleasure of the press who use this constantly to push certain agendas.

Whilst this was going on the story has moved forward and isn't about her earning more than the PM anymore, but how disliked she is by the Labour cabinet and how they want rid of her. If this, and all the various leaks are true, then as suggested on this thread she'll be gone in a couple of weeks anyway


I have posted this on the 'cheerleading' thread and not the 'critiquing' one haven't I

 

[Chicken Run]

What if he wore a blue rosette? It’s okay to be honest and outright party political, you know. What you mean is “I hate the Tories, so if they do something morally ambiguous it’s wrong. But if Labour do it I’ll defend them, because I like Labour and I don’t like the Conservatives”.

That’s absolutely better than talking into corners…

I think we are all guilty of that…me included and probably more to do with my online relationship with several posters on here rather than whether i’m bothered, must do better

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

What if he wore a blue rosette? It’s okay to be honest and outright party political, you know. What you mean is “I hate the Tories, so if they do something morally ambiguous it’s wrong. But if Labour do it I’ll defend them, because I like Labour and I don’t like the Conservatives”.

That’s absolutely better than talking into corners…

I try not to. Whilst I’m fiercely opposed to the general ideology of Conservatism I have been supportive of some Tory policies in the past, and conversely, hugely critical of some of Labours.

But getting back on topic, I can’t get worked up over some free glasses and a Taylor Swift ticket no matter who it is.

 

[Hastings gull]

He was a guest in the boardroom at Brighton. He does the right thing, which is to declare this with the notional value, and it used as a stick to beat him with.

Do other countries piss their pants over a leader going to an event like this? Or is it just the British?

I don’t have an issue with “everyday” stuff like this. I have been the recipient of free gig tickets and gig hospitality and free fancy class flights myself purely because I know people in the respective industries. As with most things, there’s a line to be drawn, and as an example I wasn’t comfortable with Boris and that huge loan he secured. The very nature of that arrangement does make you start doubting their integrity and whether it’s influencing decisions. Suits, glasses and boardroom at the Albion no.

I have always said, and posted this on here, that I don’t have an issue with privilege (or wealth) per se, it’s how people are and what people do with privilege which is my concern.

How long until someone posts a quote from me in 2010 lambasting Cameron for a freebie

So, you were privileged enough to know people in the respective industries, and used that privilege to get freebies, but it is a matter for concern when others do it.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

So, you were privileged enough to know people in the respective industries, and used that privilege to get freebies, but it is a matter for concern when others do it.

Er, no. Did you misread my post?

 

[HalfaSeatOn]

Public servants shouldn’t take freebies, full stop. That was a principle I adhered to throughout my career. It’s key for objective decision making.

 

[nevergoagain]

I don’t have an issue with “everyday” stuff like this. I have been the recipient of free gig tickets and gig hospitality and free fancy class flights myself purely because I know people in the respective industries. As with most things, there’s a line to be drawn, and as an example I wasn’t comfortable with Boris and that huge loan he secured. The very nature of that arrangement does make you start doubting their integrity and whether it’s influencing decisions. Suits, glasses and boardroom at the Albion no.

I have always said, and posted this on here, that I don’t have an issue with privilege (or wealth) per se, it’s how people are and what people do with privilege which is my concern.

How long until someone posts a quote from me in 2010 lambasting Cameron for a freebie

Suits and glasses which just happen to come from the same guy people are wondering why has/had a Downing Street pass. Passes for Glasses indeed.

 

[WATFORD zero]

Public servants shouldn’t take freebies, full stop. That was a principle I adhered to throughout my career. It’s key for objective decision making.

Someone in the British Civil service did a lot of work, including very long hours to arrange an International Conference on Ukraine. The Ukraine government invited them to the embassy for dinner in order to thank them.

Should they have turned it down and risked offending the Ukrainian Government or accepted it and declared it ?

 

[A mex eyecan]

Are you suggesting he gets a dodgy firestick?

Dont worry, I’m sure someone will buy one for him.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Suits and glasses which just happen to come from the same guy people are wondering why has/had a Downing Street pass. Passes for Glasses indeed.

As I say, I really cannot get worked up over this.

 

[Peteinblack]

Labour's self-inflicted troubles and poor judgement recently will play straight into the hands of Hard Right populists like Nigel Farage and Reform UK, who will cite it as evidence that "They're all the same; all part of the corrupt, pocket-lining, self-serving Establishment. Labour and the Tories are as bad as each other."

 

[Springal]

Did anyone know this about Secretary of State / shadow cabinet ?

 

[Bozza]

I try not to. Whilst I’m fiercely opposed to the general ideology of Conservatism I have been supportive of some Tory policies in the past, and conversely, hugely critical of some of Labours.

But getting back on topic, I can’t get worked up over some free glasses and a Taylor Swift ticket no matter who it is.

As I say, I really cannot get worked up over this.

And, frankly, neither can I. But when times are tough, and you want to take people with you, then you need to be painting a picture of being on the same journey. Starmer has done the absolute opposite of that. He has displayed incredibly poor judgement.

"Free Gear Keir" has become the story, and that undermines the task at hand.

We need this government to have two terms to be able to see some of their medium-to-long term projects through to fruition. The next election is still a long time away, clearly, but polls seem to suggest a lot of people are already feeling they put their X in the wrong box last time round.

I guess the silver lining to this cloud for Starmer is it's stopped people talking about his cruel policy to deprive some of society's poorest of the money they need to heat their homes this winter.

 

[fly high]

And these guys won't get the allowance? That is awful, clearly the threshold needs to be looked at.

It brings into question what processes and algorhyths are used to arrive at the threshold figure.

My thoughts exactly. Who came up with this figure. Seems to have been plucked out of thin air. There is no consideration on outgoings such as rent. Do I need the WFP, no I don't but some friends and family do but won't, in the big scale of things is peanuts to State finances.

 

[Mellor 3 Ward 4]

The freebies thing goes on in almost any corporate job.

In my previous job my boss and I were given free tickets to a conference in Munich, because we’d sponsored a similar event in London. I’ll be honest, we did quite a lot of drinking and not much work.

In my current job I have a range of free polo shirts with our corporate logo on, notebooks and phone dongles with the same and a company backpack. I don’t need any of them but they help promote our brand.

I’ve been a guest in 1901 of my mate’s company three times (though I prefer my WSU seat or an away end) and may be taking a client of mine in the future as they know the Van Hecke family. And SKS has only been moved at Arsenal for his own protection. Seems ok to me given some of the paranoid rubbish on Twitter. I certainly wouldn’t want to be kicked out of my seat so it could be used by a protection officer either.

What I’ve never had free, however, is a complete refurb of my house or a helicopter.

Or a complete new wardrobe for my wife.....

FFS, stop comparing him to the sh*tshow that was Johnson /Truss etc.. He promised us a new era of integrity and has failed - whilst taking away WFA from some of the UK's poorest pensioners.

As far as Arsenal is concerned, I agree he should be moved for security reasons- but he's worth north of £4 million so can pay for tickets himself.

 

[fly high]

The UK has a piece of secondary legislation called "The Pensions Increase (Pension Scheme for Keir Starmer QC) Regulations 2013" that exempts him, and only him, from being taxed on his pension savings after the first £1 million.

Worth remembering, I think, when the reports of pensioners freezing to death in their homes start rolling in this winter.

Isn't large pension pots something they want to target in the budget?