Don't Vote Labour Again (Part 3)

Lord Alli, donations and gifts

No sooner had Labour been elected on promises of 'change' and 'service' in contrast to the sleazy Tories, then their own inherent sleaze became apparent. The first story was about the Labour peer and donor, Lord Waheed Alli. It was revealed in late August he'd been given an unrestricted security pass to No 10. Labour claimed it was temporary and would expire at the end of the month. The line was that Alli was in charge of fundraising for the election campaign, and thus needed access to the PM's residence "in the period immediately following the election". He did hold a reception for donors in the No 10 garden, but why this necessitated an all-access pass for two months is unclear. To get such clearance, you have to formally work for the PM, which Alli did not.

What is clear is that Alli - dubbed 'Cashpoint Alli' - has donated a large amount of money to the Labour Party and its prominent politicians, showering these MPs in gifts. He has given about £500,000 to Labour since 2020 in regular small payments. Nearly £403,000 has been given to individual MPs in the form of cash and gifts (mostly cash). On top of that, one MP (Siobhain McDonagh) got a £1.2 million loan to buy a house for a relative.  

It emerged that between October 9th 2023 and May 29th 2024, Alli had given Starmer £16,200 worth of clothes, £2,485 worth of spectacles, £16,000 in office costs and £20,437 in accommodation. Only the accommodation donation was given during the General Election campaign (called on May 22nd) and possibly would need to be declared as an election expense. It's unclear whether it was declared as such. More recently it has been revealed Alli had actually donated *another* £16,000 worth of clothes to Sir Keir. This all adds up to £77,256, on top of the £100,000 that Alli gave Starmer towards his 2020 campaign to become Labour leader.

Alli also gave £6,134 to clothe Sir Keir's wife Victoria. This was separate from the £16,200 and only declared on October 2nd. This covered tailoring, a personal shopper, designer outfits and reportedly underwear (cue Victoria's Secret jokes). Lady Starmer was also loaned designer dresses from Edeline Lee, to the tune of £839.  

In terms of recording these payments, the extra £16,000 for Sir Keir’s clothes has not yet been added to the register of interests. The original £16,200 was not initially recorded within the required time period, or at least was not specifically itemised in the correct category. Labour claim they corrected it in September, following discussions with the relevant authorities.

The clothes and spectacles attracted the most opprobrium, because it was seen as not just extravagant, but undignified. Indeed there is something emasculating about another man buying such personal items for you, let alone your wife. When you're a millionaire and a successful professional, it's even more pathetic.

As usual, the way Starmer dealt with the story made everything worse. He showed no contrition whatsoever. He demonstrated no awareness that it looked bad and out of touch - an extravagance alien to most people and especially working class Labour voters. His minions sent out to do the media rounds were even more tin-eared. David Lammy spun that a PM (or budding PM) and their spouse have to look good to represent the country. Because there is no taxpayer funding of their outfits, he said, they have to rely on donors to provide these clothes and accessories. He completely missed the point that Starmer is already a millionaire from his earnings, and can clearly afford his own clobber. The taxpayer has funded him to clothe himself for decades, while he served as DPP, backbench MP, leader of the opposition and PM. Lammy, himself funded by Alli to the tune of £12,500, had made a foolish remark and done more harm than good. It was not the first time, and was not the last.

Another reliable fool was Jess Phillips, who had received £20,000 from the generous peer. Phillips mused that the clothes just turned up at Starmer's office and he didn't actively seek them out. Starmer himself has implied this: "In the busy period leading up to an election, I'm on the road. I'm focussed on what I'm doing. People come forward and say 'I can help and make a donation towards clothes' or something like that". This removes all agency or responsibility from himself, as if the clothes were just forced upon him and his wife. That, just like Prison Minister Timpson's business, is a load of cobblers.

Meanwhile Angela Eagle (£3,000) was questioned about Starmer's freebies and rudely said "why don't you ask him?" followed by "you've had your rant" when the interviewer brought up previous Labour criticism of the Tories getting gifts. Also taking to the airwaves was Wes Streeting (£14,600). He conflated donations to political parties with donations to individual MPs and claimed the process was 'noble'. Donors, he asserted, are "showing the same philanthropic spirit as people giving to charity. I think it is actually a noble pursuit". Sir Humphrey would say that was a 'courageous' choice of argument. Veering into Lammy territory, Streeting claimed the alternative was for taxpayers to fund politics. This was an attempt to muddy the waters and take the discussion away from extravagant freebies.  

The PM and others announced they would no longer be taking donations of (or for) clothes. In the same interview referenced above, a stuttering Starmer claimed he had only done so in opposition and would not continue now Labour was in government: "it's a... it's a different... you know, we've turned a page if you like". Nick Ferrari tried to get him to apologise for what had happened, or at least show some regret, and Starmer replied: "I'm not going to apologise for not doing anything wrong". The ever-alert Ferrari asked why if Starmer had done nothing wrong, he had stopped accepting such donations. Sir Keir was stumped by this and, as he usually does, reverted to repeating the script. On October 2nd Starmer announced he would pay back £6,000 worth of freebies, which is a paltry amount, and too little too late.

Starmer's £20,437 worth of accommodation accounted for a stay in a penthouse flat owned by Lord Alli. To be clear, Alli had let the Starmers use the £18 million flat in Covent Garden for free, but it still had to be declared as a gift. The market rental costs were deemed to be £20,437, so this was the sum recorded. Some are arguing, however, the figure is an undervaluation for such a property. Starmer claimed the family had moved there because his son needed somewhere quiet to revise for his GCSEs, as the family home was surrounded by press and was a potential target for protesters. The dates do not quite correspond to this, starting way into the exam period (May 29th) and ending a month afterwards (July 13th). The exams were between May 9th and June 19th. Many are sceptical of this account, especially as unfounded personal rumours about Starmer abound.

Potentially, Starmer broke electoral law by not putting the Covent Garden address on his candidacy papers. Added to the question of whether it was declared as an elections expense, this might complicate matters further.

Again, there was no self awareness when the penthouse situation was revealed. In Starmer's mind, there was a rational reason for it and it was within the rules, thus there was no case to answer. We've all wanted our child to do well in their exams, right? Who among us would not opt to take them to the opulent pad of a multimillionaire buddy? This doesn't fly. Just because you can legitimately or legally do something, it doesn't mean it's right. Nor does it prevent poor optics, the perception of greed or being out of touch. This is especially the case when you have positioned yourself as the antidote to all that and the paragon of public service.

Surely Labour could have seen this controversy coming down the tracks? One gets the impression they were so certain they would win, and so desperate to win, they just filled their boots with abandon. Perhaps they are just convinced of their own virtue. Or perhaps, as we have concluded before, they are not too bright.

Just before the Covent Garden story, it had emerged that Angela Rayner had enjoyed a stay in a luxury New York property of Alli. This was valued at £1,250. She was in the Big Apple for a personal holiday in December 2023, and was later 'joined' by her boyfriend Sam Tarry, who was then a Labour MP. She didn't declare Tarry was there, and neither did Tarry declare it, which could technically constitute a breach of the rules. This follows the rather murky affair of Rayner's second home which surfaced in early 2024. The police did not take any further action on that matter, but it was questionable to say the least. Ditto for Rayner, Starmer, and the lockdown beers in Durham.

Rayner also received £3,500 from Alli to buy outfits. Presumably she wanted to pick her own, what with her unique fashion tastes. The total Alli donations to Rayner are £72,450, including £50,000 provided for her Deputy Leader campaign. Rachel Reeves was given £7,367 from another donor to purchase clothes.

Alli has also given £14,000 to Bridget Phillipson, used for funding two events including a birthday party. These were supposedly held in her capacity as the shadow education minister. Phillipson, as the others, offered no contrition. Yes, one event was for her birthday - and so what? It was simply a good occasion to get unions and donors together, she maintained.

The Covent Garden flat seems to have hosted Starmer and other Labour Party figures numerous times. Starmer  filmed a broadcast there during Covid (December 13) and once again for the death of the Queen. Starmer did not declare these in the register of interests, which as they were used for official filming he should have done. During the Covid video he even repeated the guidance that people should "work from home if they can", despite not doing so himself.  Another London property of Alli has been used for Labour meetings. It's getting like everything in the Labour Party needs to involve the loaded TV mogul.

As to why Tony Blair made him a Lord is unclear. Donations likely have something to do with it, but it's hard to tell because 1998 is a long time ago and there was much less transparency then. Alli, having helped produce The Big Breakfast and the original Survivor reality show, was apparently Blair's connection to youth culture, and advised him on the matter. As a friend of Emily Thornberry (undisclosed sum in 2005) he got into the party's inner circle and quickly ascended.

So perhaps Alli gained the peerage through his wallet, but that doesn't necessarily mean he received any business advantage from it (aside from the obvious improved status). This makes his case different from that of Dale Vince, for example, who could clearly stand to gain a business advantage. In Alli's case it is probably more about personal power and influence. He does have an interest in gay issues, which probably extends to the trans movement. Is that a cause he will push for, having purchased the ear of key Labour MPs? We cannot know what his agenda is, or what happens behind the scenes, and that's the point. This kind of thing has implications for democracy and the integrity of government.

However, it is perfectly true that so long as Alli's donations and gifts are accurately declared by the recipients, they are within the current rules. Starmer is correct on this, despite missing the moral and political considerations. Of course the Tories, the Lib Dems and anyone else do exactly the same thing. It is an issue with the whole political system. Labour, however, pretended they were above such activities. Starmer pretended he was his own man, not some kind of feeble mannequin to be dressed up by a multi-millionaire. That is why this is such a story, and why it is taking a wrecking ball to this fledgling government.

Alli's Millions

• Douglas Alexander: £15,000

• Andy Burnham: £11,000 (for leadership campaign)

• Liam Conlon (son of Sue Gray): £10,000

• Thangam Debbonaire: £5,000

• Angela Eagle: £3,000

• Tristram Hunt: £5,000

• Liz Kendall: £15,475 (for leadership campaign)

• David Lammy: £12,500

• Kim Leadbeater: £4,600

• Ed Miliband: £10,000

• Siobhain McDonagh: £1.2 million (loan), £3,000 (donation)

• Jess Phillips: £20,000

• Bridget Phillipson: £14,000

• Angela Rayner: £72,450

• Owen Smith: £10,000 (for leadership campaign)

• Keir Starmer: £177,256

• Wes Streeting: £14,600

  Total: £1,602881

The gifts aren't only coming from Lord Cashpoint. Ten Labour MPs got tickets for Taylor Swift concerts, probably related to Swift's endorsement of the left in America. These, each about £1000 (for two people), mostly came from the 'Football Association Premier League Ltd'. Starmer was a recipient, as was our friend Bridget Phillipson. She showed no contrition when questioned: "I'll be honest, it was a hard one to turn down. One of my children was keen to go along, and it's very hard to say no in that circumstance". She did admit it was "a privilege", but her tone and demeanour was robotic, matter of fact and a little smug. It went down like a cup of cold sick. Darren Jones, Wes Streeting and others also enjoyed Miss Swift's caterwauling for free. Jones called it "doing a nice thing for my kids".

Since being Labour leader, Starmer has reportedly accepted 40 sets of free tickets, including many football games. Arsenal have allowed him to use a corporate VIP box with only a regular season ticket. Starmer claims he has to do this because of security concerns from sitting in the stands. That's not unreasonable, but it should be pointed out Rishi Sunak was able to sit in the stands for Southampton games (perhaps the demographics are less risky there, unlike in North London). It might be worth the extra security to make him look like a 'man of the people' - but of course, he isn't one, any more than Sunak is.

In the worst case of Labour extravagance, Angela Rayner has spent £68,000 of public money to pay a personal photographer. Simon Walker, previously the photographer for Rishi Sunak, has been employed to follow her around taking glamorous snaps. In 2021, Rayner criticised Boris Johnson for hiring photographers. She clumsily Tweeted: “the public will be rightly questioning why there is apparently no limit on the money that can be found to pay for a coterie of vanity photographers for the prime minister”. Quite, Angela. She is a weapons grade hypocrite and one of the biggest troughers in the government. Again, if Labour were serious about their 'change', they would avoid doing such things. But as we all know, Starmer is the new boss, same as the old boss.