Johnson's 15k freebie

Meryl have you the slightest idea how nasty and stupid your post sounds? Really? Really? I’m not going to say more than that - now that really isn’t worth my time.

I’ve often wondered that Hetty. Maybe he starts out knowing he’s lying and then convinces himself it’s the truth. This latest twist though IS serious. Much as most of us on here don’t like the freebie system for MPs I think we like even less the fact that information put in the Register is not true. What is going on?

I find it quite sad that someone's world is so small that they take the time and trouble to find out when Stanly Johnson sold his house ?

Does he know the difference between truth and lies?

Daisy read my posts - there’s enough to really criticise BJ for but the sale of SJ’s house isn’t one of them. BTW just heard the person named in the Register as the donor of the holiday is denying he did gift it. BJ lying - surely not ??

If no one expects nothing for nothing. There's always pay back time. Now it seems that the Johnson clan are to benefit massively from HS2! No surprise there, maybe that's the sole reason he is PM.

Yes he sold it nearly 4 years ago under the HS2 Need to Sell scheme.

Tbf Grany I thought Johnson’s father has already sold his house and it would have made no difference whether HS2 had carried on or not. Will check

When teaching we were not allowed to accept any gifts and I had to explain that so many times. Students would still leave us 'anonymous' chocolates at reception at the end of term!

It seems that it still does happen regularly with politicians and it's time it stopped. How can favouritism be avoided when gifts are acceptable?

Johnson’s dad, Stanley, received a multi-million pound compensation payout over HS2 after he had to sell his home in London

Johnson’s brother, Max, works for a firm which is set to gain from a £7 billion Euston HS2 land grab?

That's why carrying on with HS2

It’s the basic principle that is wrong - regardless of which politician we are talking about. No one is saying he shouldn’t have a holiday but that he should pay for it - there are plenty of exclusive villas available for something called rent. Your post is extremely unpleasant crafty and illogical. Declaring something doesn’t address the problem

Thanks for that, MaizieD - not!
I couldn't resist looking at the photo of Boris in his holiday attire after seing your comment, and nearly choked on my toast ! It didn't help that at first glance, through still bleary eyes, I thought he was wearing wellies too!

so what! He could not take a common package holiday and must have been exhausted. I am sure it is all above board, a holiday from a wealthy well wisher. 15k in the scheme of things is not such a lot.I just see jealousy and bad mouthing for the sake of it, as usual

Seems to be a bit of a mystery over who actually paid for this holiday. Is our PM telling porkies again?

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7997379/Prime-Minister-declares-millionaire-donor-New-Year-break-tycoon-says-Oh-no-wasnt.html

I absolutely realise that PMs (any politicians, really) accepting lavish 'hospitality' is a common occurrence, but that doesn't make it right, does it?

(PS. Suggest averting eyes from the photos in the Heil story. Our PM in holiday attire is not a pretty sight.)

I find this extraordinary.

However, I agree with growstuff, sadly I don’t think the majority of people care about Johnson’s morality, much as the majority in the US, don’t seem concerned about their President’s morality.

Having worked in senior management in Local Government for 20+ years, policy is very clear that you cannot accept gifts of any kind. Anything received was donated to charity, chocolates which we were occasionally given, were shared around the team but nothing else could be kept.
Johnson knows this ... and still accepted the luxury holiday.

I despair...

I’m not sure why just because it has always happened makes it ok. Where I worked no gifts over £250 allowed. Same could be applied to politicians.

Accepting gifts, holidays etc. has been going on since time immemorial, and is now just an excuse for a bit of Boris bashing.
What about Blair cuddling up to anyone wealthy with a villa in Italy?
All politicians, never mind their protestations of innocence, are venal and self regarding and are out for what they can get. Whether it's gifts or holidays. IMO there's no point in even mentioning their behaviour.

My H worked most of his life in LG.
They were expressly not allowed to accept any gifts.
When computers were quite unusual, except for business, he and three colleagues were visiting the head office of a Japanese computer firm and were each given a computer.
Being a Japanese company they could not refuse them but donated them to charities in the borough who were of course delighted.
Perhaps politicians should accept all gifts and then look for a worthy cause.
I am first on the list for a luxury holiday.

When my DH was in business and received any sort of gift he had to declare it and was taxed on it!

I'm at a loss to understand why a wealthy prime minister can't pay for his own holidays. Does the political nous not kick in and warn that this might not look too good, particularly so early on in his premiership.

Or is a freebie just too hard to turn down and something that's expected?

It's now disputed who did actually pay - I don't think the issue is who did pay, just that it wasn't the PM himself.

May has just received £96000 from PWC for a speech - apparently she’s been paid ( don’t want to say earned) £500,000 since leaving office. What are they really paying for?

I’ve always been puzzled that declaring a gift, hospitality or earnings or whatever in the Register of Interests somehow makes it all all right. How can it? You owe them and they don’t do it out of the goodness of their hearts.

The extraordinary thing is that for at least 200 years, as far as I understand, members of the diplomatic corps have never been able to accept gifts from people in the country they are working in; obviously as it could be construed as bribery.

The Civil Service Code says that civil servants must not accept gifts or hospitality or receive other benefits from anyone which might reasonably be seen to compromise their personal judgement or integrity

Why are our politicians allowed to accept gifts and hospitality? What about the compromising of their personal judgement or integrity?

Yes, sure that it's declared, but it must put him in his debt and so compromised. I always thought that people in public life should avoid this for reasons that are blindingly obvious.

Don't hold your breath. I'm sure that it would all have been legal and I'm becoming increasingly aware that the majority of the British public don't care about morality.