Disclosure confronts Starmer’s avoidance of direct answer about funders
A new web page published by Labour leadership candidate Rebecca Long-Bailey has laid down a clear challenge to rival Keir Starmer.
Long-Bailey has published a page listing all the major donations – above £1,500 – to her campaign. The list currently shows seven donations from a total of three donors: unions Unite and CWU, along with Momentum.
By contrast, Starmer avoided giving any kind of direct answer when he was asked live on Sky News about his funders, pivoting instead to talk about legal requirements to declare donations that will not inform members and supporters until after their votes will have been cast:
SKWAWKBOX comment:
If Keir Starmer thinks that his donors do not include groups or individuals that would discourage Labour’s left majority from voting for him, he will disclose the details.
The gauntlet has been thrown down. Will he pick it up?
The SKWAWKBOX needs your support. This blog is provided free of charge but depends on the generosity of its readers to be viable. If you can afford to, please click here to arrange a one-off or modest monthly donation via PayPal or here for a monthly donation via GoCardless. Thanks for your solidarity so this blog can keep bringing you information the Establishment would prefer you not to know about.
If you wish to reblog this post for non-commercial use, you are welcome to do so – see here for more.
Good lass well done ,
Now Sir Starmer do the same PUT YOUR MONEY WHERE YOU MOUTH IS STARMER !! TELL US WHERE YOUR DONATIONS COME FROM AND WHO’S BEHIND THEM .ALL OF THEM !
You demand our votes. We demand honesty from our potential Leaders , try and live up to Corbyns standards of integrity, honesty and what was the other thing you put on your bullshine posted leaflet ….
Kier Starmer is a millionaire barrister.
Starmer is calling for Arstair Campbell to be readmitted😱😱😱
Starmer is calling for Aliister Campbell to be readmitted
and meanwhile RLB would welcome Luciana Berger and Louse Ellman back into the party. 😕
keir-starmer-desperate-to-have-arsetair-campbell-end-his-expulsion
Everyday these people out do their last bellendedness … really beyond astonishing. I’m never giving up a rest seems vital…. when i wake up, it may just have been a weird dream.
never giving up BUT a rest seems vital…
Good to see that she has taken my advice!
People need to see the big donations BEFORE the votes are cast.
I wonder how many on the left will support RLB’s statements at the JLM Hustings.
When asked about the former NEC staff who appeared on Panorama’s so called documentary . She said: “I don’t think the party gave the right response. We should not have called out or attacked former members of staff… We should apologise for how we behaved. We should settle any claims that were made.”
RLB also confirmed that she would welcome Luciana Berger and Louise Ellman back into the party, saying what they “have been through was absolutely shocking”.
Funny I thought the article was on about dark money funding potential leaders and it’s corrupting influence ,,,,maybe my mistake and I should have gone to Spec Savers !
Perhaps it is actually about the inadequacy of the NEC’s rules regarding the disclosure of campaign funding.
Well, it’s actually about members not giving votes to someone who won’t say who his donors are – and – if they are not party members or affiliates – what they want for their money.
@ SteveH 25/02/2020 at 10:59 pm · ·
Perhaps it is actually about the inadequacy of the NEC’s rules regarding the disclosure of campaign
Well at Least Bailey has disclosed and Starmer STILL hasn’t and I doubt, just like Johnson ,that he will disclose
It is not about who says they will let whom back in to the party despite your attempt to distract from an uncomfortable truth over Starmers funding .I find that MUCH more concerning than a possible reality over membership of ” undesirables ” with the actual reality of Starmer dodging and being less than open …something that should send ALARM BELLS ringing for anyone don’t you think ?
When Jeremy was his friend I assume it wasn’t obvious that Lansman was only out for himself – it’s obvious enough to all of us here now though so should be just as obvious to her – so maybe she’s the same as him.
Maybe the ambition-obsessed gravitate to each other and what we see as faults they see as qualities?
You are making an excellent point here. But, I am not sure as to whatever Long-Bailey is over ambitious or more a question of trying to get on with everybody, her version of uniting the Labour Party, sort to speak.
Either way, she has already made several mistakes that are going to cost her.
The first was to chose Angela Rayners as running mate for deputy leader. She made the fundamental mistake of signalling that she cannot wing from the left, that she needed Angela rather than Richard as deputy to win the next GE. Hence, why to vote left at all for the leadership?
The second was appointing Jon Lasman as her campaign manager. I believe that is under his influence that she signed to the BoD’s pledges, declaring herself a Zionist and giving her blessings for Luciana Burger to rejoin the Party, while ruling out allowing Chris Williamson to do the same.
Hence, she is trying to repair the damage she has done to her campaign by declaring her donors. I don’t think is going to repair the damage, but it isn’t going to harm her.
Yes – she’s totally blown her ‘left’ credentials big time by going against Corbyn’s principled refusal to sell out the Palestinians in favour of Zionist racism. Aligning with Berger and Elman against the members spells out that she’s just another PLP careerist.
So – Starmer gets establishment money; Becky gets establishment ideas to conveniently smooth her path…. And then there’s Nandy ….. What’s to choose? We’re stuffed for choice.
Lansman must have told her that Jeremy didn’t try hard enough to placate the BoD and Israel, and that just another one or two or three or four concessions will get them on side.
Could she possibly be dumb enough to fall for that?
There is a general point to make about the hollowing out of Labour,and particularly the PLP under Bllair’s baneful rule.If the candidates are all poor,and in my opinion they are,we know the reason why.Putting Woodentop Starmer in as leader will continue the process of destroying the Labour party.With L-B,compromised though she is,there is some grounds for slight optimism.
@RH So – Starmer gets establishment money; Becky gets establishment ideas to conveniently smooth her path…
The issue here is the non disclosure by Starmer and his ducking and diving .
Are we not as a membership trying make a judgement on the integrity and honesty , something which Starmers postal leaflet crowed about , in deciding whom to vote for .
This distraction and diversion away from that behaviour by Starmer is telling …. and although some maybe intensely relaxed ( to use a well known phrase from Mandrake) about establishment money, I for one am not and more so will not be voting for Starmer
Imo he has demonstrated over his tenure in Labour ( check the voting record ) , and his clandestine meetings with TWatson and most recently loopy Paul Mason caught on camera , a less than trustworthy character unlike Corbyn and that is the standard any of them have to live up to.
The choice ,as I have said before , is PISS POOR and if there was an option to spoil my electronic vote with CORBYN for Leader I bloody well would .
It’s not shit or bust but shit AND bust for the Left and my opinion is that a new Left WIng party is the only long term answer
Look,we know you are a Starmer supporter SteveH,which is about what I would expect given your track record here.
… and?
And,it says everything about you.Your pretended concern for Assange for instance,yet you support the creep who played a very active part in putting him where he is today,your hypocrisy is sickening.Your pretended concern about the false accusations of AS in the LP,your hypocrisy is sickening.
Steve H distraction politics is the oldest trick in the book and trying to skew the argument to the AS scam will not work on here.Sir knightly Stamer is well and truly on the ropes with his foreign funders and right wing neo con hijack of the Labour party.Looks like the Irish lass has teeth and your man has the title Sir keir Starmer the old pretender.No wonder he spends other peoples money trying to hide his past.I am seriously tempted to go and vote for double barrel Bailey just on stopping Starmer and his Bilderburg “Tripartite” empire builders..Foreign money and corruption is not a good look any more than a title by a pretend socialist tory boy.Remember I know his old mates comrade!
Joseph – I’m not attempting any sort of distraction, just injecting a little balance by pointing out that Little Becky has some major problems. Surely you aren’t advocating she should have a free ride just because she is the ‘chosen one’. As for Keir’s funding neither of us knows that information yet so all this wild speculation doesn’t serve any real purpose.
I am reserving my final judgement until the actual details become clear. I will be holding off voting until just a couple of days before the deadline rather than committing my vote before I have the fullest possible picture. We’ve a while to go yet and a lot can happen over the next few weeks.
Making a decision on the basis of nothing more than innuendo is seldom a wise move.
Why do you have this rather weird and pointless obsession over Keir’s knighthood and given that you justifiably got quite pissed off by Allan Howard’s baseless accusations against yourself why do you keep making these much more serious but unevidenced allegations of corruption?
In Liverpool, she was asked why she described herself as a Zionist when the supporters of Israel in Parliament (aka Hodge; Watson; Mann et al) spent every waking hour attacking Jeremy Corbyn & Socialism. According to IHRA definition of AS this question is evidence of Anti-Semitism. God help us……by accepting this criteria we have ensured that the right to ‘Freedom of Speech’ is not available to Labour Party members. Now beware EHRC stitch-up!
Open lives are a necessary part of a truly socialist society.
Labour politicians leading the way might help bring it about.
All the arguments anyone might bring to challenge that are invalid.
“I don’t want everyone knowing my business” is a popular objection but the people expressing it either haven’t considered the advantages or they’re wealthy Tories and/or crooks.
I take it that you do know that the “Labour” (how olde worlde can you get) party is waiting for burial? The name alone guarantees extinction. A new pro and inclusive European party is needed. You killed your party and your country with your brexshit stance.
Dearie me, Chris Lovett, there IS a ‘pro and inclusive European party’ already, moron . It is called the Liberal Democrats, and how well did they do in the December 2019 General Election, matey ?
Mind you, any poster who can only refer to the complex issue of Brexit with the meaningless, content-less, term, ‘brexshit’, merely exposes his own stupidity, lack of any serious understanding of the EU, or the reasons why millions of UK citizens have voted repeatedly to leave the neoliberal straightjacket of the EU, and the fact that he is simply trolling.
“millions of UK citizens have voted repeatedly to leave the neoliberal straightjacket of the EU”
(And more millions haven’t, whilst fakes have argued against testing out the proposition more convincingly.)
Oh dear. More delusion.
They largely voted to do what Murdoch and his fellow plutocrats and side-kicks like Johnson -suggested they do. An extension was that they also voted Tory! Anyone – well the observant ones – can work that one out.
Of course, Tory dupes like you, Ha’penny, hate being put in touch with the facts. You’ve got the outcome you backed. How does it feel?
If Sir Keir is not willing to disclose his donors’ identities before we vote for him (or not), he does not deserve the trust of a vote from any Labour member. Is he ashamed of his sponsors or spooked by admitting that large donations from wealthy donors have strings attached?
Not sure he should even be IN Labour, never mind leading it.
No Donor List, No Vote.
The dream gets worse…
“in an interview with HuffPost UK, Sir Keir said he would “want anybody who wants to be in our party to be in the party”.
The Shadow Brexit Secretary added: “Alastair is a constituent of mine. And he was a long standing Labour member, a huge contribution to the party. I think we need to get past this whole question of chucking people out and expulsions, etcetera.
“The cases we should concentrate on are cases, for example, of anti-Semitism or other racist behaviour within the party.
“And I use Alastair’s case an example to say, if you can be chucked out of the party, almost straight away, for supporting another party at a [euro] election, surely you can be chucked out of our party in an absolutely clear case of anti-Semitism, and the mismatch was huge there.”
Ooh look, Starmer’s got himself into the Thesaurus – synonymous with ‘wanker’, ‘Bonjour you cheese-eating surrender monkey’, ‘invertebrate’, ‘craven’, ‘gutless’, ‘one forward gear and five reverse’ and more.
so anybody except those foreign operative want out. He will be wanting Priti Patel in the party next. She fits his definition of “anybody”.
By the way, Starmer argues in rigmarole typical of his kind, in favour of the injustice Assange is suffering.
PEOPLE is Starmer for real??? Ate any of these candidates except Richard Burgon for real??? Is Starner in some parallel universe⁉️⁉️⁉️
It seems that Jon Lansman believes that the Left need to take the soft left with them or they will only get the 11.8% that Tony Benn received in his last election for the leadership. Hence, supporting Angela Rayner etc. However, this is not the 80s, it discounts Jeremy Corbyn’s 62% of the membership vote and we’ve seen how unsuccessful the strategy has been for Corbyn and co. over the last 4y. There are too many in the PLP who will simply never accept a socialist leader and we need (and have needed) mandatory reselection urgently.
“There are too many in the PLP who will simply never accept a socialist leader and we need (and have needed) mandatory reselection urgently.”
I agree, but it is more than a little worrying that even when Margaret Hodge was handed to them on a plate after being triggered they were still unable to garner the votes to get rid of her.
As usual SteveH,your reply here demonstrates your complete lack of understanding of how easily a CLP can be stitched up by the right,especially when their/your creatures occupy key positions in the party bureaucracy.
john thatcher 26/02 at 12:39 am
“As usual SteveH,your reply here demonstrates your complete lack of understanding of how easily a CLP can be stitched up”
On the contrary John, you’ve just illustrated your own ignorance of the procedures. The subsequent vote after Hodge’s triggering was an all members OMOV. All ‘the left’ had to do was turn up on that one occasion and cast their vote. If others on the self proclaimed ‘left’ are as knowledgeable as yourself then it comes as no surprise that they failed to get rid of her.
Perhaps you could enlighten us all how this vote could have been stitched up by a RW CLP, or anyone else for that matter.
“how easily a CLP can be stitched up by the right”
So – a bit of organisational nous and energy resulting in a ‘left’ victory is ‘democracy’. But if if the right do it, it’s ‘conspiracy’.
FFS – Pathetic whining (” ‘Snot fay..er!) isn’t an answer to anything. Things are difficult enough without the main tactic being an attempt to just make people sorry for you. I don’t think the wolves on the other side will be intimidated.
Simple fact is folks, no matter who it’ll be, you’re getting the leader that rh, steve h, and the rest of the portland comms, toerag-lite, westminster careerist elitists want you to have.
They’ve already happily allowed starmer (in a minor role) to override the democratic process on implementing party policy, so seeing them defend him (by their usual M.O. of obfuscation, evasion, distraction and whataboutery) over his non-disclosure of donors shouldn’t be of any surprise to you.
They’re shouting loudest for starmer just now; and while criticising bailey currently, they’ll (grudgingly in private) accept her in the event she wins out. Shit, after a week or two they’ll revert to thinking you’re so dense you’ll have forgotten (as is their wont) and they’ll probably try to pretend they wanted her; just like they pretended they supported Corbyn.
Because they’ve convinced themselves you’re thick. rh is overt about it, stve h slightly more subtle, although no less easy to spot.
But once it all goes tits up again (And it WILL with any of them because NONE are good enough) it won’t be their fault. Oh, no. That’s on YOUR toes, not theirs.
That said, it IS fun watching steve and dicky h go into one at the mere mention of anything to do with starmer’s shithousery.
I don’t recall ever seeing as much ‘passion for Corbyn when he was coppin’ for it from ALL quarters – including slimeball starmer himself.
But they ‘supported’ Corbyn, allegedly. 👺👺👺
I take it your carer’s off again, Toff-pot?
When they’re back, see if they can help with your reading problem.
If that doesn’t help, try changing medication so that you don’t continue taking imaginings as the actual printed word.
See if it could help with the stalking obsession, too. I’d hate to think that people might write you off as just a stupid person with Tourette’s.
We’re here to help.
🙂
Sad fact is that none of them will appeal to the poorest sections of society, the same people the LP claim to fight for, but from LP members point of view RLB is the best option with what’s on offer.
Our vote was down in working class area’s and I fear this will deteriorate further as the LP appear to want to appeal more to ‘middle class professional’ voters; the people who can afford to have mediocre policies.
Judging by our campaign material (Andrex leaflets) there appears to be zero effort at informing/educating the electorate of what a socialist Labour Govt could achieve, and how it would be funded. There seems to be no intention of raising aspirations amongst the poorer sections of society.
No intentions maybe because they have no intention of being different to the other professional politicians of the Lib Dems and Tories; they don’t want or need socialist policies.
“Our vote was down in working class area’s ”
Tht’s been the case for a long time. The working class isn’t radical, or against capitalist ideology. Thus Thatcher. Never was. Isn’t now. Don’t get sentimental – Marx wasn’t.
If RLB wants to win this she’s got to come out swinging some blows now, being nice and not pulling the others on their negative points isn’t doing her any favours. Polls are dropping today with Starmer 50%+ taking it in the first round. If Starmer gets in I won’t be staying as a Labour member that’s for sure
It looks like the self proclaimed ‘left’ have slipped up big time by only having one candidate. Even if Keir doesn’t make it in the first round it looks like RLB is dead in the water because she is very unlikely to pick up many votes from Nandy supporters.
Sky News / YouGov poll
Leadership:
Round one (Starmer wins)
Keir Starmer 53%
Rebecca Long-Bailey 31%
Lisa Nandy 16%
Round two
Keir Starmer 66%
Rebecca Long-Bailey 34%
Deputy leadership:
Round one
Angela Rayner 47%
Richard Burgon 19%
Rosena Allin-Khan 13%
Dawn Butler 12%
Ian Murray 9%
Round two (Rayner wins)
Angela Rayner 52%
Richard Burgon 19%
Rosena Allin-Khan 16%
Dawn Butler 13%
Round three
Angela Rayner 58%
Richard Burgon 23%
Rosena Allin-Khan 19%
Round four
Angela Rayner 73%
Richard Burgon 27%
Looks like the worst of all possible worlds to me.
However you wrap it up the socialism project appears to be over.
‘Vote down in working class areas’. It hasn’t always gone down RH, and being an industrial worker, I’m not sentimental about my class. When socialist policies are explained LP have had massive support: never voted out in Liverpool in the 80’s.
This fella’s worth a listen to
https://youtu.be/Bkm2Vfj42FYon economics.
If the forecasts are correct then we’re in trouble.
The point I’m making, potatoclock, is that it’s a long time since the Labour Party was supported overwhelmingly by the working class (in the common definition in occupational terms) – and the trend has been generally downwards since the 1980s.
The Mark Blyth video is very much worth watching. But, in relation to the more limited question about class and the Labour Party, the implications of changing class structures and its underpinnings, the change from that point in the 1980s is what I would take away. Too much discussion of the nature of class and employment and related issues still takes place in terms of essentially 19th Century structures that are no longer a descriptive of what is happening.
This headline should read Long Bailey makes desperate bid for relevance after disastrous polling results.