Readers respond to the news that the prime minister has accepted money from a party donor to buy spectacles and clothes for him and his wife

Keir Starmer is absolutely right that there is a substantial difference between declaration and corruption (Keir Starmer suggests he will continue accepting donors’ gifts, 17 September). But he should realise that there is a crucial difference between the appearance of greed and the sort of ethical leadership he promised. Taking gifts of any substantial value gives the impression of greed when it is accepted by someone who could quite easily afford to buy the stuff themselves. Starmer should have learned that from the antics of Boris Johnson. I’ve yet to meet anyone who thinks this government has got off to a good start. The need, then, not to score own goals should speak for itself.
John Coutts
Kidwelly, Carmarthenshire

• Keir Starmer pleads: “I’m a massive Arsenal fan. I can’t go into the stands because of security reasons. Therefore, if I don’t accept a gift of hospitality, I can’t go to a game. You could say: ‘Well, bad luck’.” I don’t deny the security issue. But it’s about the acceptance of a gift. Why can’t he accept the arrangement, refuse the gift and pay the cost? I thought this was supposed to be a government of service, not self-service.
Nick Moss
London