Tories demand probe into Starmer free clothing declarations

Unlock the Editor’s Digest for free

Roula Khalaf, Editor of the FT, selects her favourite stories in this weekly newsletter.

Sir Keir Starmer is facing fresh pressure over his failure to declare thousands of pounds in free clothing for his wife Victoria after the Conservatives wrote to the Parliamentary Standards Commissioner on Monday demanding an investigation. 

Starmer declared more than £18,000 of free clothing and spectacles from millionaire Labour peer Lord Waheed Alli in April but initially failed to declare more than £5,000 clothing and tailoring for his wife.

The prime minister said on Monday that his team received advice when he came into office that suggested he did not need to declare the gifts made to his wife. They sought “further advice more recently”, he added.

“For me it’s really important that the rules are followed. That’s why I was very pleased my team reached out proactively, not once but twice, because it is very important that we have transparency,” he told reporters.

But the opposition Conservative party has raised concerns about the donations given by Alli and the Downing Street security pass he held in August despite having no formal government role. 

Alli, who is responsible for Labour election fundraising, is also reported to have suggested candidates for public jobs under a project he is said to have dubbed Operation Integrity.

Number 10 has confirmed that Alli had a “temporary” pass but said it was “given back several weeks ago”. A Downing Street aide refused to comment on Monday when asked whether Alli had attended meetings inside the building as recently as last week.

The Conservatives have written to Daniel Greenberg, Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards, demanding a probe.

“There must be a full investigation into this scandal given this is not the first instance of the prime minister failing to declare donations and abiding by parliamentary rules,” the letter to Greenberg said. 

The letter noted that in August 2022 Starmer, then the leader of the opposition, breached the MPs’ code of conduct after failing to register eight interests in time. 

An inquiry by the commissioner at the time found that Starmer’s breaches were “minor” or “inadvertent” and welcomed the Labour leader’s promise to put additional measures in place to ensure the timely management of his future registrations. 

“Worryingly it has reoccurred just two years hence,” the letter said. 

The Financial Times revealed in July that Starmer had accepted £76,000 worth of entertainment, clothes and similar freebies from UK donors since the 2019 general election, more than almost any other MP, according to FT research. 

That figure for “gifts, benefits and hospitality” spanned concerts, parties, sport games, hotel stays and clothing during the last parliament, including more than 20 free tickets to see football matches — and included the free clothing from Alli.

Alli, who made his fortune in the television industry, has also made donations to four current cabinet ministers including foreign secretary David Lammy, deputy prime minister Angela Rayner and education secretary Bridget Phillipson.

Siobhain McDonagh, a Labour MP, received an interest-free loan of £1.2mn from Alli to move house to enable her unwell sister to live with her in 2023. 

During the recent election campaign Alli spent £20,000 on accommodation for Starmer and £16,000 on “private office” costs.

The row over the disclosure of Alli’s donations has triggered attention because Starmer has long presented himself as a stickler for the rules.

It echoes the controversy in 2003 surrounding then prime minister Sir Tony Blair’s wife Cherie on a trip to Australia.

While visiting Melbourne for an international law conference she walked away with 68 items of free designer clothing after she was invited to visit the trendy “Globe International” store — most of which were for her children.

The MPs’ code of conduct states that members must register “any benefit given to any third party, whether or not this accompanied a benefit for him or her” as long as the benefit or donation was given as a result of the person’s membership of the House of Commons or their political activities.