Letters: The Starmers should give the donated cash to charity

By no stretch of the imagination can the Starmers be so much on their uppers that they cannot afford to buy all they reasonably need on a daily basis, and must rely on this charity to clothe themselves adequately to represent this country in the corridors of power.

By their actions they have demeaned themselves, and his high office, by turning themselves into objects of derision which will haunt them from now on.

If they wish to try to restore whatever reputation they had previously, as well as restoring some dignity to the roles they enjoy, they should admit they were mistaken in accepting what they did and donate the money or its cash equivalent to charity.
Alan Fitzpatrick, Dunlop, Ayrshire.

Conned by a smooth talker
OUR Prime Minister seems to have broken parliamentary rules in allowing Lord Alli to donate over £19,000 of money for work clothes and to provide  a personal shopper to kit out Lady Starmer with designer dresses and alterations, and to spend a further £20,000 on accommodation during the election and a similar sum on ”private office” costs. If so,  it is total hypocrisy, given that Keir Starmer said, prior to the election, that Labour would be transparent.

What I want to know is – why, with their joint salaries and expenses, can they not afford to pay for these freebies? How much money do they need to live very comfortably?

It is total greed on their part and an affront to the people who voted them into power. We still have to get hammered yet again in the October budget by Rachel Reeves who, in her provided home, gets her heating provided, not to mention the other perks of her office.

I as a pensioner who, like many, has worked all my days, like most pensioners, to support the welfare of others less fortunate, and yet our Winter Fuel Allowance will be means-tested .Do the rest of us not get cold, and have to choose between heat or eat?

It’s a bad show for a government that purports to be for the working class. Sadly they are in it for what they can get out of it, and the governance of the country takes second place. And we, the general public, were conned by the smooth-talking son of a toolmaker.
Neil Stewart, Balfron.

Gobsmacked by PM’s decision
I HAVE been a spectacles wearer since my early forties, more than 30 years ago. In that time I have always bought specs that were comfortable, presentable, and reasonably priced. I have never spent more than £100 on a pair over that time.

At the same time I have never felt the need for a personal shopper, and among my circle of friends and acquaintances, both male and female (and all of whom are, or have been, busy people) I have never heard mention of one.

I am not a fashion victim but I’m sure I have always been presentable. I certainly don’t judge people by their spectacles, in fact, I never notice people’s spectacles anyway unless they are the ‘arty’ types worn by some people in the media, but they’re OK with me.

I am gobsmacked therefore to read that our Labour Party Prime Minister has had thousands of pounds worth of clothing and spectacles provided by one of his rich courtiers.

Not only that, but his hitherto invisible wife has suddenly blossomed, requiring not only a personal shopper but a borrowed frock to attend the latest high-fashion events in London.

I hope the pensioners shivering in Scotland, and the three-plus-children families struggling to make ends meet are taking note. I write as the son of a miner.
John Jamieson, Ayr.

Sheer hypocrisy of the Left
IT is hard to imagine the level of vitriol, poison and malice that would have rained down on Boris Johnson or Rishi Sunak coming from Labour, the political “left” and likely including the BBC, had either accepted donations for clothes and indeed including a personal shopper for their respective wives.

Further, one can only try and imagine this happening after the “nasty” Tory Party had withdrawn the Winter Fuel Allowance. How clear though it is that the flame on the candle of “left-wing” hypocrisy is burning ever more brightly.

Finally, the ludicrousness of the defence offered by David Lammy for these donations is only matched by the comments from  Lucy Powell, Leader of the House of Commons, that a “run on the pound” may have been the consequence of not withdrawing the Winter Fuel Allowance.

It all brings to mind the quote that “When fools try to fool others, they actually manifest how foolish they are”.
Richard Allison, Edinburgh.

Starmer has no empathy
KEIR Starmer had thousands of pounds worth of clothes for himself and his wife paid for by another person. I have plenty of cash but I would never dream of buying clothes for a pal and/or his wife.

The bit that bothers me most is, What did he think that we would think about that? Troughs and Snout? What's in it for the other guy? Small potatoes for big favours?

This man who has become our PM lacks empathy. He'll never walk a mile in our shoes, and that his first act when taking office is punishing poor pensioners is proof positive that there's more bad news about fixing the house to come from Mr. Metaphor.
Stan Hogarth, Strathaven.

Broken, Brexit Britain
DR Gerald Edwards (letters, September 16) refers to problems in “health, education and transport” in his attempt to justify not allowing the people of Scotland another constitutional referendum. Robert IG Scott refers to the same problems in his attempt to justify a change from the SNP in government at Holyrood.

The fact that close examination of the data reveals that people in England, until recently effectively run by the Tories at Westminster, are experiencing much the same problems, if not worse, while the people of Labour-run Wales are suffering from greater problems in each of these areas, logically undermines the arguments of both Gerald and Robert.

It would appear that neither of these gentlemen wish to recognize that Brexit Britain is not just failing, as declared by former Prime Minister Gordon Brown, but it is irreparably broken and it will not be fixed by people burying their heads in the sand on constitutional reform or by believing a change in political party at Holyrood can fix the fundamental problems condemning many across the “United Kingdom” to a miserable future.

At least half of the population already realise that only through self-determination can the people of Scotland (whatever the political make-up of future independent governments) significantly progress their rightful democratic representation, long-term welfare and overall prosperity.

Perhaps Gerald and Robert should consider what constitutional reform they would prefer, possibly federalism if not independence – then, in the words of Stephen Flynn, we can have a constructive “grown-up” debate via these pages.
Stan Grodynski, Longniddry, East Lothian.

Nationalists wallow in their own misery
IT says something about the mindset of Scottish nationalists who want to "celebrate" the 10th anniversary of losing the independence referendum: how they love to wallow in their own misery, lamenting the good old days of being in the EU that they did not want to join in 1973, that they then chose to leave both the EU and the UK by voting Yes in the Scottish independence referendum. 

It must be difficult waking up each day not knowing what way to turn, then blaming someone else for having a bad day. As PG Wodehouse noted, "It is never hard to discern between a Scotsman with a grievance and a ray of sunshine". Nationalists give dour Scots a bad name.
Allan Thompson, Bearsden, Glasgow.

Complacency of the SNP
AS someone who voted Yes in 2014 – I've never been an ardent, card-carrying nationalist but just wanted to see Scotland finally carving out its own future – I had to agree with Kevin McKenna's excellent article (“‘Scots had independence in their grasp but SNP blew it’”, September 14). I wanted to give the SNP every chance to run Scotland efficiently but its carelessness, its hubris and its numerous errors have left me disillusioned. Maybe it has just been in power for too long and has grown complacent.
S Harris, Glasgow.