Behind closed doors some Labour figures are unsettled by the perception that Lord Alli has effectively privatised the Labour frontbench. Along with hundreds of thousands in donations his properties have been used extensively by the Labour leadership for numerous roles, as Guido revealed…

The “he doesn’t have any agenda because he’s already a peer” spin, which claims he doesn’t  intervene politically apart from ‘being Labour’, took a hit on Friday when Guido revealed Alli argued against the removal of Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad. Almost zero information exists in the public domain about Alli’s role in the Middle East, which includes his multiple meetings with Assad…

Guido can reveal that Alli was also dispatched to Iraq by No 10 to meddle in the January 2005 elections. Blair’s Downing Street pledged clandestine support to Iyad Allawi, the former member of Saddam’s security services who had earlier been chosen as interim Prime Minister by the coalition forces…

After the Labour lord was installed in Allawi’s office there was a huge increase in advertising spending on his campaign. Allawi dominated the Iraqi media landscape from that point on, leading Al Jazeera to brand him an “American puppet.” Jack Fairweather, author of ‘A War of Choice: the British in Iraq’ wrote that Alli and former Labour Party General Secretary Margaret McDonagh, his partner for the mission, suggested the “classic New Labour ploys” of polling data analysis and “working with focus groups to coordinate campaign messaging“, which were received with zero enthusiasm by Allawi’s campaign team.

By the end the Allawi campaign was a foreseeable failure, gaining a mere 13.8% of the vote. The winner was Ibrahim Al-Jaafari – the candidate of the Shiite religious establishment. Predictably Labour’s intervention to support Allawi damaged UK relations with new PM Al-Jaafari, against UK interests…

What was Alli, a TV executive best known for producing ‘The Big Breakfast’, doing intervening in foreign elections on Labour’s behalf? Why has his role been kept out of the public eye? Who paid for it? Why did Alli go on to have multiple meetings with Assad in Syria? There is much more to discover…

Business and Energy Minister Sarah Jones has had the unenviable task of fielding the morning round after Downing Street made freebiegate even worse last night by announcing that the PM would repay £6,000 worth of gifts he’d received since becoming PM. But not the football – Starmer still needs free use of a box for vague ‘security reasons‘…

Jones was asked on Times Radio if there was a suitable reason for someone like Jonathan Reynolds to accept tickets to Glastonbury, seeing as if a corporate donated them for business it would seem like corruption and if they were donated for entertainment it would look like a freebie. Her answer hinted at just how thought out the government’s new strategy on dealing with freebie criticism is…

“Well, I think that is the question that the prime minister is asking through the new set of principles… I think the question is now being asked. And that is the question that the prime minister is asking, as well as other people, for what purpose are we going to these events? Let’s look at these issues.”

Jones added later: “I’m not going to go to another event like that that I’m invited to,” while failing to explain why Starmer should be paying back his freebies and his ministers shouldn’t. Labour is struggling to deal with the logical aftermath of its incessant pious screeching over donations while in opposition…

Jones also claimed that “there is a difference between government and opposition when you’re building relationships in opposition.” These lines are unravelling the moment they’re said…

No 10 has been trying to act nonchalant and keep Keir Starmer looking statesmanly as the row over freebies rages on. With increasingly buffoonish defensive lines…

Now Downing Street has briefed that Starmer has paid back over £6,000 worth of gifts and hospitality he received since becoming Prime Minister. That includes Taylor Swift tickets and free clothes for him and his wife…

£6,000 is a measly sum – exactly 5.5% of the £107,145 in gifts, benefits, and hospitality in his parliamentary register since December 2019. And that’s only what has been registered…

In interest terms there is no difference between Starmer taking freebies while PM and while leader of the opposition. Will he repay the full £107,000? What about his Cabinet Ministers? Starmer’s made it worse again…

‘Man of the people’ Keir Starmer has racked up £107,000 worth of freebies since becoming Labour leader, and now accountants are pushing for him to pay tax on them. Robert Salter, an accounting director at Blick Rothenberg argued that Starmer should pay tax on his freebie, putting it plainly: if these were gifts given to an ordinary worker, they’d be facing a tax bill of nearly £50,000. He said that despite HMRC having no rule that allows politicians to avoid paying tax on gifts, they are treated as exempt…

By convention the taxman counts gifts to MPs as personal gifts, which aren’t taxable. Gifts to a corporate employee in a work capacity would, on the other hand, be counted as a benefit and so taxed. It’s no surprise that Starmer being given work clothes like suits and glasses hasn’t gone down well with taxpayers and accountants alike. There’s no evidence that ‘Mr Fairness’ has paid any tax on the endless Alli gifts as he continues to live it large and prepare to hike taxes for the rest of us. One rule for him, yet again…

Every Labour-briefed media profile of Waheed Alli spins that he is basically a harmless pile of money committed to one aim: a Labour victory. Starmer has repeatedly said Lord Alli got nothing in return for his support…

But the most cursory check of Alli’s parliamentary record (something not done by gaggles of Lobby journalists) reveals that he has strident and marginal views on one of the most controversial foreign policy issues of the last few years: Syria. He boasted in a House of Lords debate:

“I have visited Syria on a number of occasions and held talks with President Assad on several.”

Alli made the comments at the height of the Syrian civil war. He was speaking as the Cameron government was blocked from bombing President Assad’s Syria – after the tyrant unleashed chemical weapons on his own people. Simultaneously, Lord Alli was urging the West against taking military action in response:

“What happens when and if the Assad Government are removed? What is left behind? From my experience, it is soldiers with guns but no paymaster… I have listened to the list of things that this action is not intended to do—the same list that the Prime Minister gave in the other place. But that has not been the mood music being played by this Government over recent months. It is that mood music that frightens us all and it should be turned down.”

The next day’s tight Commons vote against action weakened the UK’s relationship with the US and France, as well as diminishing its moral authority on the international stage. The UK was reduced to a lame duck on the issue of Assad’s murderous dictatorship. On the Labour side, Corbyn would have been very pleased with Lord Alli’s position…

What was Alli doing meeting with bloodthirsty dictator Bashar al Assad on multiple occasions? In what capacity did he make his visits to Syria? Will Keir Starmer disown Lord Alli’s position on the Assad Government? Has Lord Alli made any representations to the Labour leadership over Syria? The Alli donor scandal has just taken a very unsettling turn…

UPDATE: Tories call on Starmer to distance himself from Alli and his position on Assad’s Government. A Conservative spokesperson said:

“Not only does this revelation raise some serious questions about Lord Alli’s relationship with President Assad’s regime, it puts Keir Starmer’s judgement even further in doubt.

“Starmer should disown Lord Alli’s position on the Assad Government immediately.”

Last night, Guido revealed that Keir Starmer may have breached electoral law not once, but twice, all while enjoying Lord Alli’s swanky £18 million penthouse. Starmer’s nomination papers claim he lived in Holborn and St. Pancras, but we know he was holed up in Alli’s pad over in the Cities of London and Westminster. He claimed he moved so his son could study for his exams —though even those dates don’t add up. If true, this little arrangement wouldn’t be counted in Labour’s general election expenses… unless, of course, Starmer was using it for a bit of campaigning on the side…

Now others are starting to smell blood. On BBC Question Time, Reform UK’s chairman Zia Yusuf weighed in, saying:

“There is now news just hitting the wires a few hours ago that potentially the Prime Minister has breached electoral law by misstating where his residence was… he was talking about moving to Lord Alli’s apartment apparently because [of] his son but if you spend time there overnight potentially there is a case to be had.”

The sheer hypocrisy of Starmer, who berated the Tories for breaching Covid guidance and hammered them on declaring donations improperly is one thing that cannot be ignored. Though if Starmer broke electoral law, the position of the so-called “forensic lawyer” would be shakier than ever. Zia pressed Labour MP Nick Thomas-Symonds last night, asking, “if it is the case that Starmer breached electoral law, would you call on him to resign?” Nick didn’t have an answer…