Reform

[Eagle One]

And yet he hasn’t, because it doesn’t exist.

I’ve judged that major politicians receiving £5m personal gifts is incredibly problematic, yes.

I’d imagine almost everyone would have expressed that same view 6m ago.

Farage is a clever bloke. Even if he is guilty of nothing on respect of Parliamentary rules on the £5m then it's pretty astonishing that he would just come to the conclusion that accepting this gift wouldn't cause any problems or attract any criticism. It's worse that he didn't choose to declare it as people assume there's something dodgy about it.

 

[CPFCSaturn]

Farage is a clever bloke. Even if he is guilty of nothing on respect of Parliamentary rules on the £5m then it's pretty astonishing that he would just come to the conclusion that accepting this gift wouldn't cause any problems or attract any criticism. It's worse that he didn't choose to declare it as people assume there's something dodgy about it.

Agree.

As I said previously, if you'd have polled the country 6 months ago on whether they think politicians accepting £5m 'gifts' from overseas billionaires is problematic, I'd imagine almost everyone would have agreed it is.

Even now, if this exact story was a Starmer, a Polanski or a Corbyn, the frothing you'd see on here would be through the roof.

But principles are of course optional.

 

[CPFCSaturn]

He wasn't a politician at the time.

Your judgement is unlikely to bear fruit.

No, but he was already the majority shareholder of Reform UK LTD.

No one's judgement on here bears any fruit, if you hadn't noticed.

 

[cryrst]

A little harsh.

You can support a party knowing you only support 60% of its policies as the next best party may only represents 50%.

Someone once told me the secret of what is a "good" job: more good than bad. Those on a constant quest for the "perfect" job will end life disappointed as it is an impossible illusion.

Likewise political parties. You can be both intelligent and follow one party if it is the best fit. The intelligence is knowing the 40% you disagree with. On the other hand...

Those Orwellian characters who blindly follow and believe every policy - including complete reversals - have earned that special seat on the minibus.

So if reforms immigration policy appeals to you as the most important policy they have in their manifesto it’s ok and you are not a right wing bigot. Shame others don’t see it like you !

 

[Bassak]

Someone posted this on Facebook

For anyone who still doesn’t get what people mean by “The Establishment”, this is it.
Just money, influence, titles, jobs, apologies, and the same old machine looking after itself.

Follow the money. Then tell me the system works.

David Sainsbury was one of the major financial backers of the SDP–Liberal Alliance in the 1980s, putting in hundreds of thousands of pounds.

The SDP collapses. He later returns to Labour and backs the New Labour project under Tony Blair.

By the late 1990s, he is one of Labour’s biggest individual donors.

October 1997 — Labour is in power. Sainsbury is made a life peer: Lord Sainsbury of Turville.

Not elected.
Not voted in by the public.
Put into the House of Lords.

1998 — He is given a government job as Science Minister.

A billionaire supermarket heir. A major Labour donor. Now sitting in government for eight years.

That is not a normal route into power for ordinary people, is it?

2005 — Labour is secretly borrowing millions from wealthy individuals. Sainsbury’s loan is £2 million.

2006 — He admits he failed to properly disclose that £2 million loan, despite previously saying he had. He apologises for “unintentionally” misleading the public.

July 2006 — He is questioned by police during the Cash for Honours inquiry.

November 2006 — He resigns as Science Minister, saying he wants to focus on business and charity.

No prison.
No political exile.
No great moral reckoning.
Just a quiet exit from the front line.
Then the money starts moving again.

2007 — Another £2 million to Labour, praising Gordon Brown’s leadership.

2008 — Another £500,000.

By that point, reports put his Labour donations at around £18.5 million.

From 2001 onwards, he also funds Progress, the Blairite pressure group inside Labour.

2014 — Labour-linked groups backed by Sainsbury are fined after impermissible donations linked to him while he was not on the UK electoral register.

Another problem.
Another fine.
Another quiet fix.

2016 — Millions more go into the EU referendum campaign, including Labour and Lib Dem Remain campaigns.

Corbyn years?

Funny how the big money suddenly loses interest.

2023 — Keir Starmer is heading towards power and Lord Sainsbury is back with a £2 million donation to Labour.

2024 — Electoral Commission records show another £2.5 million to Labour during the general election period.

2025 and 2026 — More money appears through Labour and Labour Together.

And in 2019, just to really hammer the point home, he gave the Liberal Democrats £8 million — one of the biggest political donations in British history.

This is not about one man.
This is about the shape of the system.
Money goes in.
A peerage comes out.
A government job follows.
Disclosure problems become apologies.
Fines become footnotes.

The money keeps flowing to whichever bit of the establishment is most useful at the time.
And everyone stands there with a straight face saying: “Well, it was all within the rules.”

That’s the point.

Nobody needs to break the rules when the rules were built around people like this in the first place.
So spare me the lectures about corruption from people who only discover standards when Nigel Farage is involved.

If this was happening on the other side, the same people would be screaming about democracy being bought.

But when it happens inside their own comfortable little club, suddenly it’s all perfectly legitimate.

Legal does not mean clean.
Declared does not mean decent.
And establishment politics does not stop stinking just because the paperwork was eventually filed.

You literally have to spell it out for the lefties...............

 

[CPFCSaturn]

Someone posted this on Facebook

For anyone who still doesn’t get what people mean by “The Establishment”, this is it.
Just money, influence, titles, jobs, apologies, and the same old machine looking after itself.

Follow the money. Then tell me the system works.

David Sainsbury was one of the major financial backers of the SDP–Liberal Alliance in the 1980s, putting in hundreds of thousands of pounds.

The SDP collapses. He later returns to Labour and backs the New Labour project under Tony Blair.

By the late 1990s, he is one of Labour’s biggest individual donors.

October 1997 — Labour is in power. Sainsbury is made a life peer: Lord Sainsbury of Turville.

Not elected.
Not voted in by the public.
Put into the House of Lords.

1998 — He is given a government job as Science Minister.

A billionaire supermarket heir. A major Labour donor. Now sitting in government for eight years.

That is not a normal route into power for ordinary people, is it?

2005 — Labour is secretly borrowing millions from wealthy individuals. Sainsbury’s loan is £2 million.

2006 — He admits he failed to properly disclose that £2 million loan, despite previously saying he had. He apologises for “unintentionally” misleading the public.

July 2006 — He is questioned by police during the Cash for Honours inquiry.

November 2006 — He resigns as Science Minister, saying he wants to focus on business and charity.

No prison.
No political exile.
No great moral reckoning.
Just a quiet exit from the front line.
Then the money starts moving again.

2007 — Another £2 million to Labour, praising Gordon Brown’s leadership.

2008 — Another £500,000.

By that point, reports put his Labour donations at around £18.5 million.

From 2001 onwards, he also funds Progress, the Blairite pressure group inside Labour.

2014 — Labour-linked groups backed by Sainsbury are fined after impermissible donations linked to him while he was not on the UK electoral register.

Another problem.
Another fine.
Another quiet fix.

2016 — Millions more go into the EU referendum campaign, including Labour and Lib Dem Remain campaigns.

Corbyn years?

Funny how the big money suddenly loses interest.

2023 — Keir Starmer is heading towards power and Lord Sainsbury is back with a £2 million donation to Labour.

2024 — Electoral Commission records show another £2.5 million to Labour during the general election period.

2025 and 2026 — More money appears through Labour and Labour Together.

And in 2019, just to really hammer the point home, he gave the Liberal Democrats £8 million — one of the biggest political donations in British history.

This is not about one man.
This is about the shape of the system.
Money goes in.
A peerage comes out.
A government job follows.
Disclosure problems become apologies.
Fines become footnotes.

The money keeps flowing to whichever bit of the establishment is most useful at the time.
And everyone stands there with a straight face saying: “Well, it was all within the rules.”

That’s the point.

Nobody needs to break the rules when the rules were built around people like this in the first place.
So spare me the lectures about corruption from people who only discover standards when Nigel Farage is involved.

If this was happening on the other side, the same people would be screaming about democracy being bought.

But when it happens inside their own comfortable little club, suddenly it’s all perfectly legitimate.

Legal does not mean clean.
Declared does not mean decent.
And establishment politics does not stop stinking just because the paperwork was eventually filed.

You literally have to spell it out for the lefties...............

Love a ChatGPT FB post.

Really simply, donating to political parties is not the same as donating to individuals - I hugely agree that both can be problematic, but you're (or ChatGPT/FB is) comparing apples and oranges.

But what you do seem to be acknowledging is that there must some political incentive for Farage's £5m gift - everyone else seems so sure there isn't.

 

[steeleye20]

Nigel Farage is at least submitting to the vote.

Something I hope, but not with confidence, that Andy Burnham is listening to.


😎

 

[silvertop]

So if reforms immigration policy appeals to you as the most important policy they have in their manifesto it’s ok and you are not a right wing bigot. Shame others don’t see it like you !

I said the highest %.

Reform struggle on that front with me not least that they don't even have spokesmen for some portfolios.

 

[Stirlingsays]

Farage is a clever bloke. Even if he is guilty of nothing on respect of Parliamentary rules on the £5m then it's pretty astonishing that he would just come to the conclusion that accepting this gift wouldn't cause any problems or attract any criticism. It's worse that he didn't choose to declare it as people assume there's something dodgy about it.

According to his speech he took legal advice.

Which is what you would expect.

 

[Glazier#1]

I refuse to vote for him

He's trash

 

[Stirlingsays]

Nigel Farage is at least submitting to the vote.

Something I hope, but not with confidence, that Andy Burnham is listening to.


😎

You are the first I've heard on the left to point this out.

Which means your criticism of uncontested leadership swaps for PMs, which the Tories copped a lot over, is a valid on in my book and not just a one eyed criticism based on 'my side right or wrong.

People shouldn't be hammered for having a political side but we can all at least criticise situations where only one side gets criticised for the same behaviour.

 

[Stirlingsays]

He's trash

I wonder, does he collect himself at the start of the week and throw up his contents into a truck surrounded by rough looking men wearing gloves.

Probably.....he went to Oxford.

 

[Stirlingsays]

Someone posted this on Facebook

For anyone who still doesn’t get what people mean by “The Establishment”, this is it.
Just money, influence, titles, jobs, apologies, and the same old machine looking after itself.

Follow the money. Then tell me the system works.

David Sainsbury was one of the major financial backers of the SDP–Liberal Alliance in the 1980s, putting in hundreds of thousands of pounds.

The SDP collapses. He later returns to Labour and backs the New Labour project under Tony Blair.

By the late 1990s, he is one of Labour’s biggest individual donors.

October 1997 — Labour is in power. Sainsbury is made a life peer: Lord Sainsbury of Turville.

Not elected.
Not voted in by the public.
Put into the House of Lords.

1998 — He is given a government job as Science Minister.

A billionaire supermarket heir. A major Labour donor. Now sitting in government for eight years.

That is not a normal route into power for ordinary people, is it?

2005 — Labour is secretly borrowing millions from wealthy individuals. Sainsbury’s loan is £2 million.

2006 — He admits he failed to properly disclose that £2 million loan, despite previously saying he had. He apologises for “unintentionally” misleading the public.

July 2006 — He is questioned by police during the Cash for Honours inquiry.

November 2006 — He resigns as Science Minister, saying he wants to focus on business and charity.

No prison.
No political exile.
No great moral reckoning.
Just a quiet exit from the front line.
Then the money starts moving again.

2007 — Another £2 million to Labour, praising Gordon Brown’s leadership.

2008 — Another £500,000.

By that point, reports put his Labour donations at around £18.5 million.

From 2001 onwards, he also funds Progress, the Blairite pressure group inside Labour.

2014 — Labour-linked groups backed by Sainsbury are fined after impermissible donations linked to him while he was not on the UK electoral register.

Another problem.
Another fine.
Another quiet fix.

2016 — Millions more go into the EU referendum campaign, including Labour and Lib Dem Remain campaigns.

Corbyn years?

Funny how the big money suddenly loses interest.

2023 — Keir Starmer is heading towards power and Lord Sainsbury is back with a £2 million donation to Labour.

2024 — Electoral Commission records show another £2.5 million to Labour during the general election period.

2025 and 2026 — More money appears through Labour and Labour Together.

And in 2019, just to really hammer the point home, he gave the Liberal Democrats £8 million — one of the biggest political donations in British history.

This is not about one man.
This is about the shape of the system.
Money goes in.
A peerage comes out.
A government job follows.
Disclosure problems become apologies.
Fines become footnotes.

The money keeps flowing to whichever bit of the establishment is most useful at the time.
And everyone stands there with a straight face saying: “Well, it was all within the rules.”

That’s the point.

Nobody needs to break the rules when the rules were built around people like this in the first place.
So spare me the lectures about corruption from people who only discover standards when Nigel Farage is involved.

If this was happening on the other side, the same people would be screaming about democracy being bought.

But when it happens inside their own comfortable little club, suddenly it’s all perfectly legitimate.

Legal does not mean clean.
Declared does not mean decent.
And establishment politics does not stop stinking just because the paperwork was eventually filed.

You literally have to spell it out for the lefties...............

Good post.

Politics is a gravy train.

You choose your gravy or turn your nose up.

To be honest I wouldn't blame anyone for turning their nose up.....but in for the penny, in for the 5 million I suppose.

Most who vote are voting for the least horrible available.

 

[Hrolf The Ganger]

If that's what is being suggested It's a debunked point anyway and more than a little dim.

If he's trying to say that intelligence and being left wing are related then how does he explain Russia's or China's education system? Both are nationalist and both are higher performers in maths and the hard sciences.

The answer is obvious.

Successful people are much more likely to take on the politics of the establishment as that gives them more opportunities and jobs. So there is an inherent incentive for intelligent people to conform to those narratives. These are social pressures and they exist within all different societies with very different politics.

It's boring having to make this point again....You'd think that an intelligent person would instinctively understand this.

I think you might have stumbled upon why Dan doesn't.

 

[Stirlingsays]

I think you might have stumbled upon why Dan doesn't.

Personally I believe he was on the troll.

Bless him.

 

[Hrolf The Ganger]

This is clearly wrong and a poor excuse by Farage. The rules ,below, clearly state past interests up to one year, so in the previous 12 months. As the press made a massive deal of say Starmer accepting glasses and a few suits from an existing Labour member of the Lords, which he declared, i think a 'hidden' donation probably 100 times higher is worth some scrutiny.

The rules for parliamentary declarations in the UK operate under a strict framework:

• When to Declare: You must declare relevant interests in almost any situation where someone else might consider them to influence what you say or do. This includes speaking in the House, submitting written or oral questions, joining select committees, and corresponding directly with government officials. [1, 2, 3]
• Scope of Declarations: Declaring interests is different from registering them. The declaration requirement is broader than the official registry and includes expected future interests, past interests up to one year old, and the interests of family members. [1, 2]

The problem is that this would be an arbitrary judgment.

Farage probably didn't declare the money because he knew that once he had decided to run, his opponents would try to use it against him. That is exactly what has happened, but he is now an elected MP, or at least he was until yesterday. It's now a little harder for them, and Reform has been ahead in the polls for most of that time.

I really do have to laugh when those on the left try to pretend that this is not a simple stitch up.

They have lost the argument and now they resort to this.

 

[Hrolf The Ganger]

Personally I believe he was on the troll.

Bless him.

As ever.

 

[Eagle One]

Nigel Farage is at least submitting to the vote.

Something I hope, but not with confidence, that Andy Burnham is listening to.


😎

Generating a by election is a Farage idea that 'OK everyone now knows what's gone on with the donations and the favours and I'll let the people of Clacton decide'.

Actually a by election is not going to negate the standards committee investigation, that's not how it works.

And I don't particularly disagree with your comment about Burnham. That said for consistency both Jenrick and Braverman should hold by elections as they were not Reform MPs when they were elected.

 

[Badger11]

This is clearly wrong and a poor excuse by Farage. The rules ,below, clearly state past interests up to one year, so in the previous 12 months. As the press made a massive deal of say Starmer accepting glasses and a few suits from an existing Labour member of the Lords, which he declared, i think a 'hidden' donation probably 100 times higher is worth some scrutiny.

The rules for parliamentary declarations in the UK operate under a strict framework:

• When to Declare: You must declare relevant interests in almost any situation where someone else might consider them to influence what you say or do. This includes speaking in the House, submitting written or oral questions, joining select committees, and corresponding directly with government officials. [1, 2, 3]
• Scope of Declarations: Declaring interests is different from registering them. The declaration requirement is broader than the official registry and includes expected future interests, past interests up to one year old, and the interests of family members. [1, 2]

On 15 September 2024, reports emerged in the British media that Starmer had initially failed to declare £5,000 of gifts used to purchase clothes for his wife, Victoria Starmer.[4] The gifts had been given by Waheed Alli, Baron Alli, who had also given Starmer a number of clothing-related gifts, including £2,435 worth of eyeglasses, and had given Labour Deputy Leader Angela Rayner gifts worth £3,550 of clothes in June 2024.[5] The donations, which included a personal shopper and clothing alterations, were said to have occurred both before and after the general election.[6]
It was subsequently reported that Starmer had accepted over £107,145 worth of gifts, benefits, and hospitality since the 2019 general election, including tickets to Arsenal F.C. matches and concerts from Taylor Swift and Coldplay, two-and-a-half times more than any other MP.[7][1][8] It was also reported that Health Secretary Wes Streeting had been gifted four Taylor Swift concert tickets, worth a total of £1,160, by The Football Association,[9] and that Chancellor of the Exchequer Rachel Reeves had accepted £7,500 worth of clothes in 2024 from Juliet Rosenfeld,[5] which were registered as donations "to support the shadow chancellor's office".[10]


Blimey I wish I had friends like they do. 😀

 

[Stirlingsays]

On 15 September 2024, reports emerged in the British media that Starmer had initially failed to declare £5,000 of gifts used to purchase clothes for his wife, Victoria Starmer.[4] The gifts had been given by Waheed Alli, Baron Alli, who had also given Starmer a number of clothing-related gifts, including £2,435 worth of eyeglasses, and had given Labour Deputy Leader Angela Rayner gifts worth £3,550 of clothes in June 2024.[5] The donations, which included a personal shopper and clothing alterations, were said to have occurred both before and after the general election.[6]
It was subsequently reported that Starmer had accepted over £107,145 worth of gifts, benefits, and hospitality since the 2019 general election, including tickets to Arsenal F.C. matches and concerts from Taylor Swift and Coldplay, two-and-a-half times more than any other MP.[7][1][8] It was also reported that Health Secretary Wes Streeting had been gifted four Taylor Swift concert tickets, worth a total of £1,160, by The Football Association,[9] and that Chancellor of the Exchequer Rachel Reeves had accepted £7,500 worth of clothes in 2024 from Juliet Rosenfeld,[5] which were registered as donations "to support the shadow chancellor's office".[10]


Blimey I wish I had friends like they do. 😀

I have some old slippers if you like. 😀