Connect with us
...

Politics

Why would Boris need an £800,000 loan?

Published

on

When Boris Johnson was prime minister, he was offered a loan of up to £800,000 to top up his income.

Details of the loan, and allegations the BBC’s chairman, Richard Sharp, was involved in arranging it, surfaced following a report by the Sunday Times.

Mr Sharp resigned from his role after a report found he failed to disclose potential perceived conflict of interests during the appointments process.

This included that he sought to arrange a meeting between Cabinet Secretary Simon Case and Sam Blyth, a distant cousin of Mr Johnson who had offered to support the then-PM financially.

Mr Sharp insists he did not play any part in facilitating or financing the loan but conceded he should have declared his role in seeking to set up the meeting.

Mr Johnson says his financial interests have been properly declared.

But why would Mr Johnson need a loan this big in the first place?

Those who know Mr Johnson say they weren’t surprised by the size of it.

One source who worked with Mr Johnson in Downing Street said the former prime minister was not an “extravagant person” but that amount of money was “not a lot” to sustain his lifestyle during his premiership.

During his time at Number 10, there was speculation Mr Johnson was short of cash to cover childcare and divorce costs, among other bills.

‘Income plummeted’

When he first became prime minister, in July 2019, he claimed a total salary of £154,908, on top of other sources of income. That’s far above the median UK pay packet, which was £33,000 in 2021.

There is no doubt Mr Johnson had to take a big pay cut when he gained high office, first as foreign secretary in 2016, and again when he became prime minister in 2019.

“His income plummeted,” says Andrew Gimson, author of Boris Johnson: The Rise and Fall of a Troublemaker at Number 10.

“So it’s not surprising that he decided the best thing to do was to borrow the money, as he expected his earning power to be large once he stopped being prime minister.”

It’s true that, before becoming prime minister, Mr Johnson had a lucrative career as a journalist, a public speaker and a TV personality.

One major source of income was his gig as a columnist for the Daily Telegraph newspaper. Between July 2018 and July 2019, he was paid £22,916.66 a month by the newspaper, for what he said was 10 hours’ work.

Parliamentary records show he pocketed tens of thousands of pounds in fees for writing books, penning articles in publications – such as The Spectator, the political magazine he used to edit – and making speeches at events.

Boris Johnson in 2003
Mr Johnson is a former editor of The Spectator

In total, Mr Johnson’s employment and earnings added up to about £800,000 in the 2017-2019 session of Parliament.

‘Properly declared’

If that figure looks familiar, it’s the same value of the loan reported by the Sunday Times.

A spokesperson for Mr Johnson told the newspaper he withdrew far less than £800,000 from the loan, which was described as a credit facility.

Mr Blyth – a multimillionaire Canadian businessman and distant cousin of Mr Johnson – is reported to have raised the idea of acting as a guarantor for the loan. This means he would guarantee the money would be paid back if Mr Johnson did not meet the repayments.

Mr Johnson has not revealed who was offering to lend him the money.

But a spokesperson for the former PM said: “All Mr Johnson’s financial arrangements have been properly declared and registered on the advice of officials.”

As for how the money was used, the Sunday Times says the funds helped Mr Johnson finance day-to-day expenses and his lifestyle as PM.

One bill that came in during his premiership was for the refurbishment of the flat above 11 Downing Street, where he lived with his wife, Carrie Johnson, and their children.

Divorce settlement

Mr Johnson had to stump up £52,000 to reimburse a Conservative Party donor who had initially paid for a designer revamp of the Downing Street flat.

Prime Minister Boris Johnson and wife Carrie Johnson
Boris and Carrie Johnson in the Downing Street garden after their May 2021 wedding

Add to this a reported multi-million pound divorce settlement with his second wife Marina Wheeler, with whom he has four children, in 2020.

In the past, Mr Johnson has complained about his financial position.

When he was the mayor of London in 2009, he told the BBC his £250,000 a year salary from the Telegraph was “chicken feed”, adding he made “a substantial donation to charity”.

Then, in October 2017, when he was foreign secretary, the Sunday Times reported he had told a friend he was running out of money and could not afford to live on £141,505 because of his “extensive family responsibilities”.

Given these financial pressures, one of Mr Johnson’s former staffers said it was sensible for a sitting prime minister not to be worrying about their financial stability.

Mr Gimson echoed that view, saying “it’s not new for Boris to be living or earning at a rate that most of us can only dream of”.

The author said while Mr Johnson was “very keen on making large amounts of money”, he was personally known to be “quite frugal”.

The loan, Mr Gimson said, suggests Mr Johnson “hoped to be prime minister for a lot longer than he was”.

Now he’s left office, Mr Johnson is entitled to claim an allowance of up to £115,000, as all former prime ministers are.

But the Liberal Democrats say Mr Johnson should be stripped of the allowance until he answers questions about his financial arrangements while he was prime minister.

“We know he’s only interested in following the money, so it’s time to hit him where it hurts – his wallet,” said Wendy Chamberlain, the party’s chief whip.

However, his earnings since returning to the backbenches dwarf any allowance he’s entitled to as an ex-PM.

Mr Johnson has already been paid more than £5.3m for speeches and articles since leaving Downing Street in September, according to the register of members interests.

Reports /TrainViral/

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Politics

Gething downfall delivers Starmer 1st headache

Published

on

By

Just when you’d have been forgiven for thinking politics might quieten down a bit…

The Welsh Labour government was for so long a case study in how the party could operate in power during its long years of opposition at Westminster.

And yet here we are less than a fortnight into a UK Labour government, and the Welsh Labour government is imploding.

So much for all that talk about bringing stability back to politics.

Last week Vaughan Gething was sharing smiles here not just with the new prime minister but the King too.

Now, he’s a goner, delivering Sir Keir Starmer a headache rather than a handshake.

When I was here in March covering Mr Gething’s victory, the seeds of his political demise were germinating before our eyes.

The donations row had already sprouted and his defeated opponent, Jeremy Miles, legged it from the venue without so much as any warm words about the victor on camera.

It was another sign of the cultivating anger, the political knotweed that would soon flourish and ensnare Vaughan Gething.

Along came the row about alleged leaking, a sacking, a confidence vote — and a first minister whose tenure up until today at least amounts to 2.4 times that of Liz Truss. Ouch.

Westminster has generated its fair share of turbulence in the last decade.

But it is far from unique as a source of turbulence in UK politics.

In February, Michelle O’Neill became first minister of Northern Ireland with Emma Little-Pengelly her deputy, after a long period without devolved government at Stormont.

In March, we had a new first minister of Wales, when Mark Drakeford stood down and Vaughan Gething took the job.

In April we had the resignation of the first minister of Scotland Humza Yousaf.

He was replaced the following month by John Swinney. June was the quiet month then. Just the small matter of a general election campaign.

And here we are in July, and Mr Gething is resigning.

So will begin another leadership race, a new government in Wales, a new first minister and a new team of senior Welsh ministers.

There will also be more arguments about Welsh Labour – its direction, its priorities, its capacity to govern effectively and its relationship with the UK party.

If you’re watching this in Downing Street, it’s the last thing you need.

Reports /Trainviral/

Continue Reading

Politics

Shoplifting crackdown expected to be unveiled

Published

on

By

A crackdown on shoplifting is expected to be announced in the King’s Speech on Wednesday.

The government is due to unveil a new crime bill to target people who steal goods worth less than £200.

The policy would be a reversal of 2014 legislation that meant “low-value” thefts worth under £200 were subject to less serious punishment.

The government is also expected to introduce a specific offence of assaulting a shop worker to its legislative agenda.

It will not be clear until legislation passes through Parliament what the punishments for any new or strengthened offences would be.

Data from the Office for National Statistics shows that last year was the worst on record for shoplifting in England and Wales.

Police recorded over 430,000 offences in those nations in 2023 – though retailers say underreporting means these figures are likely to represent only a fraction of the true number of incidents.

Michelle Whitehead, who works at a convenience store in Wolverhampton, said her shop had been “hit every day” by thieves.

People were stealing “absolutely anything” including “tins of spam, tins of corned beef, all the fresh meat”, Ms Whitehead told BBC Radio 4’s World at One programme.

“They’re just coming in, getting their whole arm and sweeping the lot off the shelves,” she said. “The shelves were always empty.”

She said she believed “organised” criminal gangs, rather than individuals struggling with the cost of living, were behind the thefts in her shop.

The crackdown on “low-value” shoplifting “will help a lot of little shops,” Ms Whitehead said.

While retailers and shop workers have welcomed the anticipated proposals, a civil liberties group has raised concerns about criminalising people struggling to make ends meet and overburdening the prison system.

The new legal measures are expected to be announced as part of the King’s Speech on Wednesday, a key piece of the State Opening of Parliament that allows the government to outline its priorities over the coming months.

Before the general election, the Labour Party pledged to reverse what it described as the “shoplifter’s charter” – a piece of 2014 legislation that reduced the criminal punishment for “low-value shoplifting”.

Tom Holder, spokesperson for the British Retail Consortium (BRC), told BBC News the impact of the 2014 legislation has been to “deprioritise it in the eyes of police”.

“I think police would be less likely to turn up to what they see as low-level theft,” he said.

Shoplifting cost retailers £1.8 billion in the last year, which could impact prices, according to the BRC.

“Shoplifting harms everyone in that sense – those costs eventually get made up somewhere, whether it’s prices going up or other prices that can’t come down,” Mr Holder said.

Co-op campaigns and public affairs director Paul Gerrard said the supermarket chain had also recorded rising theft and violence against shop workers.

“There’s always been people who will steal to make ends meet. That’s not what is behind the rise we’ve seen,” he told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme on Tuesday. “What’s behind that rise is individuals and gangs targeting large volumes of stock in stores for resale in illicit venues like pubs, clubs, markets, and out the back of cars.”

But Jodie Beck, policy and campaigns officer at civil liberties organisation Liberty, had concerns about the expected proposals, saying there is “already a wide range of powers” the police can use to tackle shoplifting and anti-social behaviour levelled at retail staff.

Ms Beck said the “£200 threshold” would not just target criminal gangs but also “people who are pushed into the desperate situation of not paying for things” because they cannot afford to make ends meet.

She urged the government to avoid focusing on “criminal justice and policing solutions instead of doing the thoughtful work of looking at the root causes of crime, which we believe are related to poverty and inequality”.

Ms Beck also argued the additional legislation could serve to worsen the UK’s “enormous court backlog” and its “bursting prison system”.

Last week, Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood announced plans to release thousands of prisoners early to ease overcrowding in the country’s prisons.

A spokesperson for Downing Street said the government would not comment on the King’s Speech until it has been delivered by the monarch.

The National Police Chiefs’ Council has been approached for comment.

Reports /Trainviral/

Continue Reading

Politics

Government launches ‘root and branch’ review

Published

on

By

Defence Secretary John Healey hailed the government’s defence review as the “first of its kind” and said it will “take a fresh look at the challenges we face”.

Mr Healey noted the “increasing instability and uncertainty” around the world, including the conflict in the Middle East and war in Ukraine, and said “threats are growing”.

The strategic defence review will consider the current state of the armed forces, the threats the UK faces and the capabilities needed to address them.

Sir Keir Starmer has previously said the review will set out a “roadmap” to the goal of spending 2.5% of national income on defence – a target he has made a “cast iron” commitment to but is yet to put a timeline on.

On Monday, the prime minister said the “root and branch review” of the armed forces would help prepare the UK for “a more dangerous and volatile world”.

The review will invite submissions from the military, veterans, MPs, the defence industry, the public, academics and the UK’s allies until the end of September and aims to deliver its findings in the first half of 2025.

“I promised the British people I would deliver the change needed to take our country forward, and I promised action not words,” Sir Keir said.

“That’s why one of my first acts since taking office is to launch our strategic defence review.

“We will make sure our hollowed out armed forces are bolstered and respected, that defence spending is responsibly increased, and that our country has the capabilities needed to ensure the UK’s resilience for the long term.”

The review will be overseen by Defence Secretary John Healey and headed by former Nato Secretary General Lord Robertson along with former US presidential advisor Fiona Hill and former Joint Force Commander Gen Sir Richard Barrons.

The group will have their work cut out.

The global security threats facing the UK and its Western allies are more serious and more complex than at any time since the end of the Cold War in 1990.

They also coincide with what many commentators have said is a catastrophic running down of the UK’s armed forces to the point where the country is arguably no longer considered to be a Tier One military force.

In terms of the number of troops in its regular forces, the British Army is now at its smallest size since the time of the Napoleonic Wars two centuries ago.

Recruitment is failing to match retention, with many soldiers and officers complaining about neglected and substandard accommodation.

The Royal Navy, which has spent vast sums on its two centrepiece aircraft carriers, is in need of many more surface ships to fulfil its tasks around the globe.

Its ageing fleet of nuclear-armed Vanguard submarines, the cornerstone of the UK’s strategic defence and known as the Continuous At Sea Deterrent (CASD), is overdue for replacement by four Dreadnought class submarines and costs are mounting.

Commenting on the review, Mr Healey said: “Hollowed-out armed forces, procurement waste and neglected morale cannot continue.”

Too many UK commitments?

The defence and security threats facing the UK, Nato and its allies further afield are multiple.

They include a war raging on Europe’s eastern flank in Ukraine against Russia’s full-scale invasion. The UK, along with the EU and Nato, has opted to help defend Ukraine with multi-billion pound packages of weapons and aid, stopping short of committing combat troops.

The policy behind this is not entirely altruistic. European governments, especially those closest to Russia like Poland and the Baltic states, fear that if President Putin wins the war in Ukraine it will not be long before he rebuilds his army and invades them next.

Some of those countries are already busy beefing up their own defence spending closer to 3% or even 4% of GDP.

The challenge for Nato has been how to provide Ukraine with as much weaponry as it can, without provoking Russia into retaliating against a Nato state and risk triggering a third world war.

The Royal Navy has been in action recently in the Red Sea, where it has been operating alongside the US Navy in fending off attacks on shipping by the Iranian-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen.

But the UK has also made naval commitments further afield in the South China Sea with the Aukus pact, comprising of Australia, UK and the US, aimed at containing Chinese expansion in the region.

Critics have questioned whether a financially-constrained UK can afford to make commitments like this on the other side of the world.

Closer to home in Europe, there is a growing threat from so-called “hybrid warfare” attacks, suspected of coming from Russia.

These are anonymous, unattributable attacks on undersea pipelines and telecoms cables on which Western nations depend.

As tensions increase with Moscow there are fears such actions will only increase and the UK cannot possibly hope to guard all of its coastline all of the time.

But while those nervous Nato partners living close to Russia’s borders are busy beefing up their defence spending closer to 3 or even 4% of GDP, the UK has so far declined to put a timetable on when it will raise its own defence spending to just 2.5%.

Opposition figures have criticised the government for refusing to say when defence spending will be increased.

Before his election defeat, former prime minister Rishi Sunak committed to reaching 2.5% by 2030.

Shadow defence secretary James Cartlidge previously said: “In a world that is more volatile and dangerous than at any time since the Cold War, Keir Starmer’s Labour government had a clear choice to match the Conservatives’ fully funded pledge to spend 2.5% of GDP on defence by 2030.

“By failing to do so, they’ve created huge uncertainty for our armed forces, at the worst possible time.”

Reports /Trainviral/

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2024 TechDaja News.