Analysis Breaking

Tories made a whole new law just to increase Starmer’s pension (no, seriously)

SKWAWKBOX (SW)By
80 Comments on Tories made a whole new law just to increase Starmer’s pension (no, seriously)

‘Opposition leader’ benefited from Tory legislation enacted specifically to benefit him

‘Labour’ ‘leader’ Keir Starmer has rightly been attacked for his closeness to the Establishment and the British security state, which has seen him mount no meaningful opposition to the Tories while colluding on repressive legislation such as the ‘spycops’ law to give undercover police and spies immunity from prosecution when they commit any crime, and lining up with Tory PMs to attack, among others, the Black Lives Matter movement and Extinction Rebellion.

Starmer has also been criticised for his opportunism in criticising the Tories for their recent changes to pension tax law, when he was the beneficiary of a scheme to increase his own tax-free pension allowance.

But this was not just a scheme. The Tory government of 2013 enacted a whole new law to provide Starmer with a bigger pension when he was Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP).

Seriously:

As DPP, Starmer infamously promised the US state that autistic hacker Gary McKinnon would be extradited to face lifetimes of imprisonment and flew to the US to grovel when Theresa May killed the extradition. On his watch, at the very least – Starmer has allowed mouthpieces to deny his direct involvement and the paperwork has conveniently been destroyed – the case serial sex criminal Jimmy Savile was not pursued by the Crown Prosecution Service.

And after breaking every promise he made in order to con Labour members into voting for him as leader, he mounted a purge of the left to try to ensure the privileges of the Establishment would never again be threatened by a Labour party that actually represents the people and the real change they need – while also voting for or abstaining on various attacks on our civil liberties that have put the UK on a par with Burkina Faso for democracy and freedom. Despite regularly trying ad nauseam to gain mileage out of his ‘human rights lawyer’ background, Starmer has also kept entirely silent on the manifestly unjust and political imprisonment of journalist Julian Assage, whom the Establishment intends to send to the US despite the complete collapse of the US government against him when their main witness admitted he had been lying all along.

Now he’s making a show of attacking the Tories on pensions while his spokespeople refuse to say whether Labour would actually change the new law if they get into government.

SKWAWKBOX needs your help. The site is provided free of charge but depends on the support of its readers to be viable. If you’d like to help it keep revealing the news as it is and not what the Establishment wants you to hear – and can afford to without hardship – please click here to arrange a one-off or modest monthly donation via PayPal or here to set up a monthly donation via GoCardless (SKWAWKBOX will contact you to confirm the GoCardless amount). Thanks for your solidarity so SKWAWKBOX can keep doing its job.

If you wish to republish this post for non-commercial use, you are welcome to do so – see here for more.

80 comments

    1. Don’t panic Andy, someone will be along shortly on this thread to tell you categorically that

      – the evidence does not exist;
      – not to believe the evidence;
      – that the evidence is the opposite of what it actually demonstrates etc etc etc
      – and that you can safely go back to sleep
      – nothing to see here;
      – don’t fret;
      – don’t be gullible/delusional
      – please follow the link to this totally irrelevant piece to aid you in thinking about something else
      – and that the enormous effort of time and resources to convince you not to believe your senses is in no way part of a psi-ops operation.

      This has been a public service announcement to improve the efficiency of the site.

      Have a nice day.

      Reply

      1. Dave – On the contrary I am here to say that it has been a matter of public record that has been freely available for anyone to see since this Act was passed in the House of Commons in 2013.

      4. As a dog returns to its folly so a fool repeats his folly.

        – Proverbs 26:11

      5. Dave – ¯⁠\⁠_⁠(⁠ツ⁠)⁠_⁠/⁠¯
        Should we be impressed?

      7. “Dave – What has your vanity got to do with anything?”

        Don’t call us and definitely don’t give up the day job.

    1. That’s going to be an interesting process to watch, Toffee, given that Starmer and most of the PLP don’t have a clue what a woman is?

      Reply

  4. Talking of women – I see that Claudia Webbe has
    been subjected to racist and misogynistic
    abuse by a man. He has been sentenced to
    28 months in prison.

    I think I mentioned here that I complained to the BBC
    about her being wrongly accused of threatening
    an acid attack by a Tory MP on “Any Questions”.
    The program took place on July 1st but it was a while
    before I’ld formulated the complaint in a manner
    acceptable to The BBC. (I was required to say within
    a few minutes when the accusation took place.)

    In the end I got a mealy-mouthed email from the BBC
    which seemed more interested in evading blame than
    in justice to Claudia. They admitted in the email to me
    that she had not been guilty of what the Tory said and
    in addition edited the offending words from the program
    on iPlayer. They also announced before the program
    that it had been edited .. but not a hint of why ..

    Reply

  6. I thought some of you might appreciate this.
    https://youtu.be/hytO-oSzdD8
    A new song called ‘Free Assange’ by Lowkey, featuring Mai Khalil and The Grime Violinist, has been released on the 20th anniversary of the Iraq War, as part of States of Violence, a collaboration between a/political, WikiLeaks and the Wau Holland Foundation.

    The video features a clip from ‘Collateral Murder’ released by WikiLeaks on the 5th of April 2010. It shows a classified US military video depicting the indiscriminate slaying of over a dozen people in the Iraqi suburb of New Baghdad — including two Reuters news staff and his rescuers

    Reply

  7. Tories made a whole new law just to increase Starmer’s pension

    If they’re not careful, they’ll soon catch up with Tony Blair with his 13,000 new laws to facilitate and reward Wealth, its accumulators and pissing-off ordinary hard-working citizens.

    Starmer, though, is certain to outdo them both.

    Reply

      1. “Labour has said the rules for Sir Keir’s pension as DPP were set by the government at the time, which was headed by Conservative PM David Cameron.

        A Labour spokesman said: “The rules for the DPP’s pension are set by the government of the day, in this case the coalition government, and followed the precedent for all DPPs.

      2. Just think… The *ahem* democratic socialist known as keef could’ve made political capital (scuse the pun) out of it, had he piped up abar it a lot sooner than having it exposed by *ahem* “opponents” and even then ONLY as a result of his hypocrisy .

        But he kept schtum for 10YEARS. And Joe Public was none the wiser.

        Not a question of whether he’s taken advantage of the situation. It’s a question of transparency.

        Or rather the abject lack of it. To nobody’s surprise.

      3. Toffee – You mean like it being a matter of public record in the form of an act of parliament?

      4. Errr…..no.

        I mean it not being reported on and brought under wider scrutiny until now…when the toerags brought the matter to light. Not keef himself. (Socialist that he is) And even then it didn’t come from the 4th estate,but from the same people that procured it for him.

        How many of the laws (especially the ones to do with civil liberties) bliar (and the toerags since) have got through on the QT? Thousands that neither you nor me are aware of.

        How many of them exempt those same people that make and uphold them? (My guess is it’s a shitload).

        How many others that involve financial interests (and benefits) to the already rich-as-croesus are we not being told about? (Worth looking into but I bet it’s not as many)

        This is a law about an individual. , regarding preferential treatment for said individual’s pecuniary interest.

        For what reason was keef granted such exempt status? Not as if he was much cop at his previous job. At least not where the plebs are concerned; as an establishment stooge I guess is the sole reason he got his “reward”.

        Just because Joe Public aren’t beneficiaries does NOT mean it ought to have been buried away out of the public eye.

      5. Toffee – I’m guessing that will have been for the same reason that his predecessor and successor were apparently granted the same benefit and it is probably much the same reason that this type of benefit was also granted to Judges . There’s nothing to stop you from looking up the debate and the vote in Hansard if you’re interested, you could then let us all know what your research has revealed.

      6. I’m guessing that will have been for the same reason that his predecessor and successor were apparently granted the same benefit

        Guessing.

        Ok. I just can’t be arsed anymore.

        BUT…. Let’s see the tax break Corbyn copped for ..And especially on an individual basis.

        Legislation doesn’t say: keef AND PREDECESSORS

        Says Keir smarmer and NOBODY ELSE.

      7. The claim has been made by one steveH that:

        “I’m guessing that will have been for the same reason that his predecessor and successor were apparently granted the same benefit and it is probably much the same reason that this type of benefit was also granted to Judges . There’s nothing to stop you from looking up the debate and the vote in Hansard if you’re interested, you could then let us all know what your research has revealed.”

        Well, guess again:

        The title of the Specific Legislation in question, supplied at the top of this article is:

        “The Pensions Increase (Pension Scheme for Keir Starmer QC) Regulations 2013”

        It would seem reasonable to surmise that similar legislation covering previous and subsequent DPP’s would have the same title structure.

        Searching for this legislation in Hansard is not the place to go. The correct source is an external site here:

        https://www.legislation.gov.uk/

        And typing in “The Pensions Increase (Pension Scheme for Keir Starmer QC) Regulations” – ie dispensing with the year does indeed produce a single result for Keir Starmer in 2013.

        Unfortunately, no results exist for Starmer’s immediate predecessor Ken Macdonald (2003-2008) using:

        “The Pensions Increase (Pension Scheme for Ken Macdonald QC) Regulations”

        Nor for Ken Macdonald’s predecessor David Calvert Smith (1998-2003). Or Calvert Smith’s predecessor Barbara Mills (1992-1998). Or Mills’s predecessor Alan Green (1987-1992). Or Green’s predecessor Thomas Hethrington (1977-1987) first head of the CPS.

        Starmer’s immediate replacement, Alison Saunders (2013-2018) similarly produces no legislation on the statute Book under this title.

        And, sadly, neither does the present incumbent Max Hill (2018-present day).

        Even a generic search using “The Pensions Increase (Pension Scheme for Director of Public Prosecutions) Regulations” provides no results.

        Every single UK DPP incumbent since the the CPS was first formed back in 1977, apart from the incumbent between 2008-2013, appears to have no Parliamentary legislation on the Statute Book dealing with their, specific to that individual incumbent of the DPP Post, Pension increase.

        As Starmer vacated his post in 2013 – the year in which this legislation was enacted onto the UK Statute Book – one wonders what warranted this largess for this one individual and not others prior to Starmer holding that position nor those since Starmer?

        At least three questions (for now) occur:

        1. Was it advance payment for services to be rendered?

        2. Why is Starmer apparently stating in public now – ten years after the event – that he will remove this legislation if he becomes PM? He clearly had no objection in 2013.

        3. Given this will not affect any other individual there is nothing to stop Starmer from introducing a bill to scrap this legislation which affects only himself right now. Why wait?

        This “sudden” conversion is nothing other than cynical optics. If it had not been brought to public attention Starmer would have stayed stum.

        And the problem is that most people – no, scrap that bit – most NORMAL people – can figure that out with little effort. Seeing someone who flips from one position to another to suit convenience.

        Little wonder he has less credibility as a leader than Richie Rich Sunak.

        Once again we’ve done your homework for you steveH.

        You really are as idle as Ludlam’s dog.

      9. @dave hansell

        Maybe jump on yandex? Maybe look into cufflinks and the fella who was never charged.

        Maybe there’s your reason…

      12. Dave – Not at all, I simply can’t be bothered.
        However as you’ve obviously got time on your hands and nothing better to do please don’t let that stop you from keeping yourself busy searching for non existent dirt. Hopefully it will keep you occupied and out of trouble.

      13. In fairness to SteveH, Starmer’s predecessor Ken Macdonald’s equivalent statutory instrument is The Pensions Increase (Pension Schemes for Kenneth Macdonald) Regulations 2007. There’s a similar SI for David Calvert-Smith (just swap the names, 2003). I just searched the names on legislation.gov.uk.

        In fairness to Dave Hansell, the same process didn’t turn anything up for the other former DPPs, pre- or post-Starmer. Mind you, I don’t remember pension rules from earlier – maybe they didn’t need the exemption creating for them as the rule didn’t exist at the time. Alternatively, they just legislated without putting the person’s name in the title.

      15. “Thanks”

        You’re welcome.

        The bills for services rendered is in the post.

  8. There’s. no debate. about it

    Keef failed to prosecute savile. Failed to prosecute Rotherham.

    Ignored/disregarded Elaina Cohen’s (amongst others) complaints.

    But he’ll look after women & kids

    Reply

    1. Correct Toffee, Starmer did indeed fail to prosecute Savile. So Savile continued to rape little kids. Now Starmer’s getting wound up about dope smoke wafting through the public’s windows. Priorities, priorities.

      Reply

    2. Toffee – Oh dear, here we go again, you falling back on the same old nonsense.

      Keef failed to prosecute savile.
      But you already know that not only did the detailed report into the Savile case not find that Keir was responsible for these failures to prosecute but you also know that Savile’s victims and their lawyers don’t agree with you either. It makes one wonder why you continue to disrespect Savile’s victims by repeating these lies for no other reason than a pathetic attempt to score silly factional points.

      Failed to prosecute Rotherham.
      …..and Keir has fully acknowledged that there had been failures and he personally led the enquiry that culminated in Keir making the changes that have (and continues to do so) resulted in the successful prosecution and jailing of literally scores of these evil criminals.

      Ignored/disregarded Elaina Cohen’s (amongst others) complaints.
      When you’ve actually read Cohen’s Employment Tribunal’s judgement come back and tell me what actions you think that Keir Starmer should have taken. Here’s the link https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/Elaina-Cohen-v-Khalid-Mahmood-MP-judgment.pdf

      Reply

  9. Kinell ,. Anyone watchin the newsnight interview with sarah .. whoever??

    Erm…erm….erm…erm…..

    Reply

  10. SteveH24/03/2023 AT 12:32 AM
    Toffee – Oh dear, here we go again, you falling back on the same old nonsense.

    Incorrect. Keef failed to prosecute the nonsense No ifs, no buts, no equivocation and NO excuses

    The buck starts & stops with him.

    And it’s only to be expected that you’d put up a case for him, seeing as you think it was ok for keef to ORDER labour peers to ABSTAIN on a vote for a policy that leaves children going hungry.

    Wrong ‘un. Are the locals on your Caribbean idyll aware of your views? I had it my way and it’d be tattooed on your forehead so everyone knew what you’re about.

    Reply

    1. https://ukdaily.news/i-am-a-rotherham-grooming-gangs-survivor-and-we-were-betrayed-by-keir-starmer-we-live-with-the-abuse-every-day-259574.html

      Sir Keir is already facing calls to sack Beck after, as chief prosecutor, he admitted the abused girls had been betrayed by the justice system

      Rotherham victims disagree. What say YOU to THAT, nonce excuser?

      …Well?

      Oh, speeding fines = full weight of the law. Keef prosecutes personally (so he said in the commons – another barefaced LIE)

      Sexual abuse of children by high profile pederasts and organised pederast gangs = Weren’t nowt to do with me, I knew nowt of savile, honest!!

      Tell you what; let’s have one of the culprits responsible for your continuing abuse through his wilful ignorance, stand for your mp.

      After all, madge hodge is a good friend to keef (and israel). She did the same thing so what would another one matter?

      Despicable nonce-enabling, nonce excuser.

      Reply

      1. Sir Keir is already facing calls to sack Beck after, as chief prosecutor, he admitted the abused girls had been betrayed by the justice system. Rotherham victims disagree. What say YOU to THAT, nonce excuser? …Well?

        Well thanks for your‘mashup’ quote, Here’s a more representative quote from the same article “Elizabeth says Rotherham Grooming Gangs victims feel ‘betrayed’ by Sir Keir Starmer over Dominic Beck’s nomination as [Labour] candidate”

        As for Keir acknowledging that these girls had been let down I quite clearly stated that above This is what I said – …..and Keir has fully acknowledged that there had been failures and he personally led the enquiry that culminated in Keir making the changes that have (and continues to do so) resulted in the successful prosecution and jailing of literally scores of these evil criminals.

        Weren’t nowt to do with me, I knew nowt of savile, honest!!
        There is absolutely no evidence that Keir knew anything about this. Please feel free to contradict me if you have something credible to offer.

        Tell you what; let’s have one of the culprits responsible for your continuing abuse through his wilful ignorance, stand for your mp.
        Dominic Beck stood down some time again. You can read what he had to say for himself here.
        https://labourlist.org/2022/12/dominic-beck-stands-down-as-labour-candidate-for-rother-valley/

      2. There is absolutely no evidence that Keir knew anything about this.

        There’s NO evidence keef DIDN’T know about savile. Only his word….which ain’t worth a bucket of shite.

        But of course he KNEW about huhne’s speeding…Because HE HIMSELF prosecuted the case (liar).

        The buck starts and stops with keef. Nobody else He’s always going on about how he was the honcho at the cps.

      3. Well thanks for your‘mashup’ quote,

        Dafuq’s “mashup” about it, numbnuts?.

        It plainly states that that girl herself said she was betrayed by keef smarmer. And she was – just like HUNDREDS of others.

        “But keef personally led the enquiry”

        So.
        Fucking.
        WHAT?

        Stable doors and horses, you stupid, STUPID NONCE EXCUSING GOBSHITE.

        Had he done the job properly in the first friggin place he wouldn’t have needed an inquiry into HIS OWN fuck up that caused HUNDREDS of girls to suffer prolonged sexual abuse.

        Far from it absolving keef, it highlights just how utterly fucking useless to society the greasy headed cretin is No mitigating for it.

        Kids were nonced. Keef didn’t do anything about it. The end.

      4. Toffee – There’s NO evidence keef DIDN’T know about savile. Only his word….which ain’t worth a bucket of shite.
        ……apart from the findings of the enquiry and the judgement of Savile’s victims and their lawyers who I’m guessing know a little more about it than you do. There is ‘surprise, surprise’ no evidence about lots of things that that didn’t happen. But you knew that already, didn’t you.

        But of course he KNEW about huhne’s speeding…Because HE HIMSELF prosecuted the case (liar).
        It is my understanding that it was Keir Starmer who authorised the prosecution of Huhne and his wife for Conspiracy to Pervert the Course of Justice which is by no means the petty crime you are seeking to imply (the pair of them got jail time). This was of course in line with his duties as DPP
        But you knew that already didn’t you.

        The buck starts and stops with keef. Nobody else He’s always going on about how he was the honcho at the cps.
        https://skwawkbox.org/2023/03/23/tories-made-a-whole-new-law-just-to-increase-starmers-pension-no-seriously/#comment-241862

        Do you have anything worthwhile to contribute?

      5. It is my understanding that it was Keir Starmer who authorised the prosecution of Huhne and his wife

        Oh….HE KNEW about THAT, did he?

        But his subordinates decided to keep him out of the loop re: savile and he knew NOTHING of it?

        savile – Who SHOULD have been prosecuted for the EXTREMELY SERIOUS crime of noncing kids….not trying to blag their way out of a fucking speeding fine, for absolute and total fuck’s sake.

        BUT SAVILE WASN’T. BECAUSE KEEF DIDN’T PROSECUTE HIM.

        What a thoroughly disgusting nonce excuser you are.

    2. Toffee……

      Was Savile prosecuted by Starmer who was DPP at the time? No, so therefore he FAILED to prosecute him. Also Starmer has stated he oversaw every high profile child abuse case in the country whilst he was DPP, but not the Savile case, a fact supported by Mr Nazir Afzal who worked with him at the time.

      Then of course the Savile case files were destroyed, funny that. They think we’re all Sun readers.

      Reply

      1. They think we’re all Sun readers.

        You mean the type keef wants to vote for him??

      2. Well given that it is a fact that the decision not to prosecute was taken before reaching the stage where it would come to Keir’s attention (as confirmed by the subsequent enquiry) and that he took decisive action to try and ensure this could never happen again it is difficult to see how you can in all fairness hold Keir Starmer personally responsible for this failure from much lower down the pecking order. Yes he was the DPP at the time but that isn’t the same as having had any knowledge of the case let alone any involvement in the case. When this outrage came to light Keir did his duty as DPP by taking the steps to fix the problem so the same situation wouldn’t re-occur.

  11. Can someone on here tell me who is Starmers core vote
    Or
    Will we discover very quickly his Prevarication/Dishonesty and complete lack of a moral compass or any progressive policies, will lead to everyone hating him
    Methinks there’s hope

    Reply

      1. Two Cheeks
        Where would the world be with JC and Bernie Sanders
        Like all revolutiona it will appear to be hopeless then miraculously the tectonic plates shift
        Congratulations on being on the wrong side of history

      2. Doug – I don’t think Corbyn will even stand at the next election, why would he take the risk?

    1. Speaking of undemocratic things, I see benny netanyahoo’s in that london today, amidst protests about Israeli judicial <I "reform".

      Bet keefs’ creaming himself.

      Reply

  13. TEN broken pledges
    NEIN to renationalisation
    HATE keef smarmer
    SEVEN shades of shite
    SIX brexit tests fail
    FIIIIIIIIIVE bullshit “missions”
    FOUR fucks sake keef
    FREE Julian Assange
    TWO fucks keef don’t give

    …And keef’s a tool of the board of deputies.

    (I wuz bored, sorry 😕)

    Reply

      1. Not really.

        Hearing you have something terminal will make my day though.

      1. Really? All I can see is you making shit up.

        “Toffee – I’m guessing that will have been for the same reason that his predecessor and successor were apparently granted the same benefit”

        Were they, indeed? Apparently not.

        So you’d best evidence your claim, hadn’t you, Walter? 😏

      2. Reminds me of this anonymous quote:

        “If you see people that don’t exist they put you on medication. But if you see jobs that don’t exist they hire you as a motivational speaker”

        When it ain’t there it ain’t there.

        But go on steveH. Your turn. You find it. Put up or shut up.

    2. Obviously some people here operate on the basis of ‘why have a dog and bark yourself.’

      Reply

  15. I’d like to know who tabled the legislation (and how it was set out). I’ve got two names in mind…No, hang on – best make that four.

    Two have the same surname, but only two exist, if you catch me drift? 😙🎵

    Reply

    1. You could always try something novel and look at the legislation online.
      Not really, in reality it appears to be a not very big fuss about nowt, if there was anything here that could be used against Keir we would have known about it by now.

      Reply

      1. Gee, thanks for the tip – but I’ve already taken the liberty of having done that before I asked the question.

        Perhaps you should’ve taken your own sage advice, and checked to see if indeed other DPPs/CPS heads had received the same perk, before you leapt to the completely wrong conclusion.

        As for your pearl of wisdom in calling it a big fuss about nowt I don’t regard the sticking down on a legislation purposely designed to benefit an individual (especially HIM – a public servant} as “nowt”..

        As Dave Hansell asked; why hasn’t keef moved to scrap it if he hasn’t taken advantage of it and has no intention of doing so – and why do we only just find out about it now, almost ten years later, hmmm? Keef’s been an MP for nigh-on eight of those ten years.

        Who tabled the legislation, and for what purpose?

        And we still haven’t been told why keef didn’t overrule the met and charge michael green/ seb fox/ grant shafts, instead of retiring as DPP on the very same day the met made a public statement that shafts’ dealings may have constituted FRAUD?

        Might’ve redeemed himself somewhat following savile & Rotherham; not forgetting damien green, but I suppose keef was probably “unaware” of the shafts case too, eh 😙🎵

  16. Toffee – “Gee, thanks for the tip – but I’ve already taken the liberty of having done that before I asked the question.”

    ARE YOU SURE ABOUT THAT – HOW ON EARTH DID YOU MANAGE TO MISS THIS🤔

    Statutory Instruments – 2013 – No. 2588 – Pensions
    The Pensions Increase (Pension Scheme for Keir Starmer QC) Regulations 2013
    Made – 8th October 2013
    Laid before Parliament – 9th October 2013
    Coming into force – 31st October 2013

    The Treasury, in exercise of the power conferred by section 5(2) of the Pensions (Increase) Act 1971(1) and now vested in them(2) hereby make the following Regulations:
    Citation and commencement
    1. These Regulations may be cited as the Pensions Increase (Pension Scheme for Keir Starmer QC) Regulations 2013, and come into force on 31st October 2013.
    Interpretation
    2.—(1) In these Regulations, “the 1971 Act” means the Pensions (Increase) Act 1971.
    (2) For the purposes of these Regulations the time when a pension “begins” is that stated in section 8(2) of the 1971 Act(3).
    Pensions to which the 1971 Act shall apply
    3. The 1971 Act shall have effect in relation to any pension payable under the Pension Scheme for Keir Starmer QC (being a scheme made under section 1 of the Superannuation Act 1972(4)), as if it were a pension specified in Part 1 of Schedule 2 to the 1971 Act.
    Desmond Swayne
    Stephen Crabb
    Two of the Lords Commissioners of Her Majesty’s Treasury
    8th October 2013

    Reply

    1. And just WHERE are the legislations for both predecessor(s) AND successors, gobshite??

      Just HOW did you miss the point (deliberately) ??

      desmond swayne & steven crabbe – one sharp dressed, the other a class traitor ….. Both MPs of renown, eh?

      But I don’t see a singlelabour mp putting it forward…😙🎵

      Reply

      1. And as you’ve provided the nominators)proposers (both toerag by the way) perhaps you’d be so clever or as to give us the voting record on said legislation?

        Who did what …😙🎵

      2. Toffee – A simple thank you would have sufficed, isn’t this precisely the information that you requested?
        ps, You really should educate yourself about statutory instruments before commenting further.

      4. Again, in fairness to SteveH (I do rather dislike typing that), statutory instruments only need a vote in Parliament if someone objects to them. As there was precedent from at least the previous two DPPs, it’s not a surprise that nobody did, so they simply become law without any discussion or debate.

        Similarly, it’s not surprising that Conservative Government ministers tabled the SI, as that’s one of their functions – ‘Labour’ ministers in 2007 and 2003 would’ve tabled the SIs for the previous DPPs, which probably also weren’t objected to.

        We can argue as to whether or not Starmer should have accepted the provisions for swerving tax on his pension, and we certainly have, but I’d be reluctant to read much more into it than just business-as-usual, as opposed to a greater conspiracy.

        Starmer’s opposition to the changes to the pension cap for everyone, while benefiting from a specific exemption himself (I mean, the SI has his fucking name in the title) seems hypocritical at the least, but he’s made it clear that he supports it in the case of, for example, judges, doctors and former DPPs, which is handy. Me, I’m trying to work out how many years I’d have to work for my pension pot to be above £1million, and I think I need to work until the heat death of the Universe to reach that level.

      5. To assist in getting nearer to that level, Stark, you might consider sending a bill for services rendered to the Caribbean (allegedly).

  17. After spending some time with family and then the NHS, I come back to find there have been quite a number of reports with no comment facility.
    Never mind, I’ll just say it here.
    Keep an eye on Deutsche Bank this week.
    DB is one of the world’s 30 biggest banks (actually 29 now that Credit Suisse tumbled).
    The shares fell by 14% on Friday.

    Reply

    1. And the consequences of that are everywhere on the “Home Front” – as articulated here:

      https://fredoneverything.org/to-hell-with-ukraine/

      “Great. Just ever-lovin’pea-pickin’ great. In LA some sixty thousand people–who really knows?–sleep on the sidewalks, in tents, cardboard boxes, sleeping bags, or not much of anything. Others live in their cars. The same in San Fran, Seattle, St. Louis. There being no bathrooms, they defecate as the urge hits, and where. What choice do they have? Some are junkies, others crazy, many just with no jobs or jobs that don’t pay enough for a room.

      Meanwhile Biden sends billions to Ukraine, lots of billions, our billions, while America crumbles within. A corrupt, senescent, second-rate lawyer mysteriously empowered to bankrupt his own country to benefit a corrupt, dirtball country of no importance to America.

      How is this possible? Why do Americans tolerate it?

      Because they have no choice. Americans have no influence over their government except in things that do not matter to that government.

      Recently my stepdaughter Natalia, Mexican, went to Austin to visit friends. She returned and pronounced America a truly odd country. All the houses were the same, so how could you find your way home at night? And there were lots of people, she said, living under bridges and on the sidewalks. This she thought strange. She had never seen such a thing in Mexico. In twenty years, neither have I.

      Meanwhile Biden sends fortunes to Ukraine. How is this? Couldn’t we have an American President? Just once? Someone who cares about people in his own country? No prospect of this is in sight

      In America there are people, lots of them, who don´t have enough to eat, or barely do. Appalachia, the Rust Belt, the rural Deep South. I wonder whether Biden has enough to eat. I wonder whether he cares that many of his citizens do not. No, come to think of it, I don’t wonder. But he cares, cares deeply, about Ukraine.

      America crumbles, but Biden is going to rebuild Ukraine. Our trains look like something out of Turner Classic Movies. The passenger versions, across the continent, are nice, slow but appealing as period pieces. Chatanooga Choochoo, all that. They are also primitive and badly maintained. We have had four freight derailments in a month or so.

      No, make that five. This morning we read of another, in Arizona. This is Third World, pushing Fourth. But Biden is going to do what it takes, for as long as it takes. For Ukraine….

      ….The water is undrinkable in Flint, Michigan and Jackson, Mississippi and, I am told by my daughter who lives there, in New Orleans. What the hell kind of country allows this? Answer: A bushworld country, or one whose government is more interested in Ukraine than in its own people.

      But, if I may, another word on trains. My wife and I were in China several years back, and rode their high-speed trains (180 miles per hour). They are startling, smooth, quiet, gorgeous. China has 24,000 miles of them. Their high-temperature superconducting maglev version, with carbon-composite body, at 360 miles per hour, is in late-stage development. America has not a nanometer, not an angstrom, of either. Coming back from Chengdu was like returning from a scifi movie.

      But Biden sends billions to Ukraine, a little, little man eating prime rib in the White House while a couple of hundred thousand die for him in Ukraine. Anything for Ukraine. Anything at all.

      Americans do not go to doctors because they cannot pay the bills. Unlike countries of the First World, America does not have decent national medical care. Do you suppose that Biden lacks medical care while he sends money, desperately needed by America, to Ukraine?”

      The populations of France and Germany, along with much of the European mainland, are starting to feel those same consequences and the UK populace, as another vassal of a failing empire, will fare much worse as they are used a fodder by an out of touch and deranged elite and their useful idiot cheerleaders.

      Reply

Leave a Reply to Dave HansellCancel reply

Discover more from SKWAWKBOX

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading