this will turn out to be as intriguing as the vast majority of politicians’ expenses fiddles, i.e. not at all.
There's a difference between In the Public Interest and what's interesting to the public
It's not an "expenses fiddle", it is a "disguised income scandal"... and it's the cover up that'll end up being a mark against him. As PM, he should work for us, and his other 'earnings' should all be declared and above board. When measures have been used to keep the money hidden... it's the hiding that's the problem, no matter who the source of the money was.
You have a wildly over-active imagination: this will turn out to be as intriguing as the vast majority of politicians’ expenses fiddles, i.e. not at all.
Do I indeed? Well it seems like they're going to an awful lot of trouble to make sure the identity of the benefactor doesn't become public knowledge. It's pretty clear that Boris had tapped somebody specific up. Or do you think its all entirely innocent and the membership subs from the blue-rinses of Bournmouth payed for all that tasteless chintz?
And while the vast majority of expenses claims were extremely boring, everyone remembers the duck houses and moat-cleaning. After the sacrifices a lot of people have made over the last year, Carries £900-a-roll wallpaper might well be the same. Especially if it turns out to have been paid for by one of Vlads mates
There’s a difference between In the Public Interest and what’s interesting to the public
I don't disagree, but that doesn't seem to be relevant to what I said.
It’s not an “expenses fiddle”, it is a “disguised income scandal”… and it’s the cover up that’ll end up being a mark against him. As PM, he should work for us, and his other ‘earnings’ should all be declared and above board. When measures have been used to keep the money hidden… it’s the hiding that’s the problem, no matter who the source of the money was.
I didn't say that it is an expenses fiddle - I said it would be as intriguing - so you can spare me the lecture.
So far, it's looking pretty similar to the first Mandleson scandal.
So far, it’s looking pretty similar to the first Mandleson scandal.
Yes it is.
Now you've made that link, could you please stop trying to bore us into accepting that it doesn't matter, and that everyone should look away? Thanks.
https://twitter.com/barneyfarmer/status/1387379935791222786?s=19
I missed PMQs, did BJ get in a "snipin from the sidelines"?
I ll have to find his meltdown sounds v enjoyable
Do I indeed? Well it seems like they’re going to an awful lot of trouble to try and make sure the identity of the benefactor doesn’t become public knowledge
Yes they are but if you had paid attention to the story over the last few months it doesnt need any Russian skulduggery.
It looks like he overspent massively probably assuming the taxpayer would pay for it anyway.
When that didnt happen he has been trying to get various others to pick up the bill including his attempt to set up a charitable trust to handle it for him.
None of them have worked but whilst doing so various rules appear to have been breached.
You dont need the Russians involved for this kind of screw up indeed if they had been they would have probably been able to funnel him money in a less traceable way.
Now you’ve made that link, could you please stop trying to bore us into accepting that it doesn’t matter, and that everyone should look away? Thanks.
Please stop attributing opinions to me that I do not hold and have not expressed. Thanks.
Can we slip another Cold War Steve in at this point...?
You dont need the Russians involved for this kind of screw up indeed if they had been they would have probably been able to funnel him money in a less traceable way.
This is very true. Or alternatively they could just help him out and declare it, if it was someone like Lebedev. Johnson hasn't been exactly shy of him in the past. Although I suppose elevating someone to the House of Lords, while arranging for them to pay for your expensive pointless baubles isn't the best look for a PM.
Does the killfile still work?
but that doesn’t seem to be relevant to what I said.
Because you seem to want to infer that it's dull and therefore shouldn't be something that people should be worried about or interested in. Our Prime minister, according to the Electoral Commission, may have committed an offence or offences.
that's not "nothing"
So far, it’s looking pretty similar to the first Mandleson scandal.
Thats the first time they got him to resign, right? Sounds good so far (minus the comebacks but then Johnson has already burnt through a few of those in previous careers so we could hope he has used up the equivalent comebacks).
Speaking of the first Mandelson scandal that was the one Johnson wrote a homophobic column about celebrating his resignation wasnt it?
Because you seem to want to infer that it’s dull and therefore shouldn’t be something that people should be worried about or interested in.
You are mistaken.
Our Prime minister, according to the Electoral Commission, may have committed an offence or offences.
that’s not “nothing”
I haven't said otherwise.
I haven’t said otherwise.
Thats the first time they got him to resign, right? Sounds good so far (minus the comebacks but then Johnson has already burnt through a few of those in previous careers so we could hope he has used up the equivalent comebacks).
Speaking of the first Mandelson scandal that was the one Johnson wrote a homophobic column about celebrating his resignation wasnt it?
Right - a party colleague lent him money to buy a house and he didn't declare it. So this is looking similar, and definitely a resignation issue for me if true. But suggestions of foreign skulduggery seem like the product of febrile imagination.
I don't remember the column but wouldn't be at all surprised.
Everybody is referring to it as his home. It’s not, he doesn’t own it, it’s a residence while he’s in office. It’s been renovated for free by a Tory donor apparently. Why would an average Joe in the street really give a monkeys. As long as it hasn’t cost me personally a penny from my taxes why would I care.
I reckon that I could be this and decorate it for his budget.
perhaps a free yacht or a new rolls from saudi prince, whats the harm in that eh? as long as it doesn't come out of my taxes
if it needs explaining to you then its obviously above your pay grade
As long as it hasn’t cost me personally a penny from my taxes why would I care.
This the cut and paste line that ministers have been sent out to deliver in the past 24 hours. I suspect the ones who agreed to do so (all no marks really, none of the big guns) will be feeling used and abused soon enough, if the bullshit fails to stick. Of course you should care where our PM is getting his personal funds from, especially if he is trying to keep them secret. Who he works for may be on a need to know basis… but every voter has the right to know, and there are rules underpinning that right. It should be published transparently.
Everybody is referring to it as his home. It’s not, he doesn’t own it, it’s a residence while he’s in office.
Wonder if they’ll be steaming the wallpaper off to take with them when they leave 🙂
I think the eye opener is the amount of (other peoples)money they were spaffing on somewhere they don’t own.
There was a lot of tv coverage in London recently over the state of some of the housing people were living in.
Being upset about his curtains isn't a worry for the man in the street
But, we don't know what the donor got in return
Brownlow, if it was him, has companies that have had millions from the taxpayer including covid contracts
It's why there are rules in place and they broke lots to make this happen
https://twitter.com/Peston/status/1387439773946613760?s=20
Ultimately I reckon it will be the Tory party that Johnson pins the blame on
But the taxpayer also directly conned if he was using it as a tax dodge
https://twitter.com/marty_mcd/status/1386810376143130629?s=20
This the cut and paste line that ministers have been sent out to deliver in the past 24 hours.
Its almost certainly false as well. It seems a bit odd that when faced with the bill over and above the allowance he would have decided sod it I will pay the lot.
Watched HIGABMNFY the other night. Ian Hislop was spot on.
When is the revolution starting or is the country happy to be led by a lying, blustering prick?
Unfortunately, it appears the country is happy with that...
Johnson wrote a homophobic column about celebrating his resignation wasnt it?
"Bum boys crying into their beer" wasn't it?
Full Telegraph quote can be found here:
It’s not a gift though is it. He’s not getting a freebie to keep. It’s been refurbished and it hasn’t cost us a penny. That’s why nobody is going to really care about this, especially when there is so much other stuff to deal with. Who paid for the curtains that don’t belong to him isn’t going to ruffle any feathers with the voters. Making a big thing of this is the wrong tact for Labour. By all means push for who was awarded what and if the taxpayer got value for their money but this just feels a bit desperate.
It’s been refurbished and it hasn’t cost us a penny.
Oooo… aren’t we lucky! Have you fallen for this line, or just dissembling?
it hasn’t cost us a penny
Quid pro quo innit.
You don’t know what the real cost was/will be 🙂
It’s not a gift though is it. He’s not getting a freebie to keep.
so to be a gift it needs to be a keepable tangible object.... 3 weeks at the Ritz with coke and hookers on 24hr call please.
Anyone gifting anything to anyone in power are not doing so purely out of good will and kindness.
The *expletive* is bent.
Same goes for Dyson..... We'll make you machines, but we want a tax break first.
Philanthropy at its finest.
It’s not a gift though is it.
Its a benefit & a taxable one
tax he's trying to avoid
And if someone came in & redecorated my house id consider it a gift
I think whilst many of his more populist supporters won't care too much about where the money came from (wrongly) they will be pretty horrified at how he's spent on curtains compared to what they can afford, doesn't do his man of the people persona any good.
That’s why nobody is going to really care about this, especially when there is so much other stuff to deal with
In spite of the best efforts of the Tories to tell us why we don't (or shouldn't) care, it absolutely does matter.
It’s not his property is it. It doesn’t belong to him. Why would you get taxed on something that doesn’t belong to you. It belongs to the taxpayer. Am I missing something here? It’s not his house. If you need something refurbished by your employer so you can do your job is that a benefit in kind? If your company cars needs repairing is that classed as a taxable benefit?
It belongs to the taxpayer
Try popping along to visit "our" property and see how you get on...
It’s not his property is it. It doesn’t belong to him. Why would you get taxed on something that doesn’t belong to you.
like company cars?
So if my office at work gets redecorated, that’s a benefit that I should pay tax on? I need that office to do my job, I take it he needs that flat to do his.
So if my office at work gets redecorated, that’s a benefit that I should pay tax on? I
If you live in it, yes
All I’m saying is there are bigger fish to fry.
Everybody I’ve spoken to at work when this has come up in conversation has rolled their eyes and said surely there are more important things to crack on with.
